This thread is for archival and reference purposes only. For the past couple months, LJG and I have been hashing out the technology system via e-mail. These discussions have been useful for my reference, and I have decided to post them for the following reasons:

1) It is not possible to search the e-mails by keyword in the current storage form. There are so many e-mails that I often can't find a discussion I need. Posting these allows me to easily search through them.

2) These e-mails could be useful for anyone who wants to know why the tech model is in its current form. LGJ and I have already discussed and debated many topics, and rather than go over them again I would like to be able to point people to a reference so they can see the discussions.

3) The ITS at our school is not the world's most reliable. I would hate to lose all of this, for reasons mentioned above. I will be graduating this year anyway, at which time the account will be purged.

Pesticides: Farm output increases by some percentage. The player is partially or fully immune to a Locust Swarm natural disaster, depending on province infrastructure. Pollution increases and there is now a chance for an Algae Bloom natural disaster.
(I don't know if these disasters exist in the game, but I think they should.)

Radio: Ship navigation improves. Naval groups fight at increased effectiveness. Culture becomes more homogenized across any section of your civ that is served by a power grid. (The dominant cultural agent in the most advanced province is considered to be in charge of programming.) Also, it becomes easier for your government to spread propaganda.

If this kind of thing is okay, I will fill the tech tree Effects column.

Ok that's fine. A few weeks then. I'll prob be inputing the numbers then
since i'm the head hancho of techs and i know about what i want them to be.

> read MS Word formatted documents? Wordperfect in not on the school
network.

Well its basically the idea of having a place to go to see a healer or
doctor and where he can do basic research and stuff. Also 2 or more healers
would prob be in this area. b4 this healers/medicine men would travel around
or have no perm set of residence.

> Acupuncture
> Discovery of Chi
> Dualism
> Harmony with Self
> Harmony with Nature
> Non-Interference
> Tai-Chi
> Theory of Change
> Way of Enligntenment
> I have looked over the tree and none of these seem to do anything
major
> other than Clinic. Why would the player want to research them? Also,
they

I tend to disagree on a few and will tell which a little futher down.

> show a definite preference for Eastern thought. I can work up a Template
> proposal that includes both these and the ideas from other cultures if I
get
> more information from you about what you wanted to do with these.

Yes well a lot of techs also have western slant to them too i can even name
a few offhand:
knighthood, castles, cavalry, monotheism, religious infrastucture.

Anyway Tai-Chi, harmony with self/nature and way of enlightenment do for
sure as well as prob dualism and discovery of chi because these all
represent the religous thought of those places which tend to not be
montheistic (that is a western thought)

> Way of the Blade
> Martial Arts
> Ninjitsu
> Curballi
> Katana
> Again, Culture specific techs. It should be fairly easy to make these
> Template techs.

True, martial arts was also used in the primitve form called wresting in the
west. Ninjitsu is definatly orential related but if u can find a
non-specific one for this that's fine otherwise i still think we should have
it. Curballi is defin a western type armor. I'm not too fam with the names
of the armor in the east and the only reason i have curballi is because it
is an improv over leather armor, but not as good as mail/plate armor...kinda
a transition. I put katana in because it rep the best sword ever made. This
really can't be argued because of the way they made it by folding the metal
over & over in almost atom-think layers to make it stonger. The technique
was never used in europe and is lost today, but only another katana can
break a katana (kina like only a dimond can scratch a diamond).

> Sentient Electronic Life.
> This should have MAJOR consequences. At the very least a new cultural
> agant should be created. There should also be a signifigant chance of the
> AI rising up against you. I personally don't think this tech should be
> included, but I will still write the effects list.

I think so. Even today you'd be surprised at how advanced things are
getting. This obviouslly is one of the "few" future techs i wanted in
there. and your right about it having signifigant impact.Idon't know about
the uprising though. Here me out:
First off this was in a manga i have called "Ghost in the Shell", the idea
atleast. Athough put in a comical way it is pretty much true. We would
before the uprising be maintaining the robots, giving them repairs, keeping
them well maintained, giving them what they need for free (atleast to them).
Now when they uprise they'd have to start doing it themselves and if they
subjigated us we'd still be doing it so what do they have to gain? Well in
the manga all that ended up happening was they wanted to be treated kinder
(say please and thank u basically).

> Genetic Engineering
> I think this one should become a Basic Technology like synthetics. It
> is an entire field of study, not just one thing. When it reaches certain
> percentages, new techs become available.

Okay i'm up for that...of course u know the idea of basic techs is to help
elim some non-basic techs and that's why were using them or we'd have too
many.

> Network
> I also recommend making it a basic tech. At a certain percentage it
> becomes World Wide Network.

Maybe. to both. First off networks really haven't changed much. The
technology has made them faster, but that would be handled in computers and
as far as the WWN goes well that should also have other requirements such as
international law (soft prereq), and other nations would haveto have similar
levels of network then so i'm not too sure.

> Architecture
> Archway
> Column
> Concrete
> I think this is getting a bit too specific. Can we wrap them all into
> an Architecture basic tech?

Well first off architecture should have been dropped from normal techs.
maybe for archway and collum, but not concrete since it was a major
advancement.

> Fine Arts: You don't have it and no one on the Clash team seems to be
very
> knowledgeable about it. Can we make it a basic tech and have it be a soft
> prerequisite for some things?

I was working on some, but the prob is some aren't really tech related.
here's what i have and i don't really want these grouped into a "fine arts"
tech. Also i'd like some help coming up with a few specific techs related
to these, however, i don'twant these to be era specific unless it requires a
certain tech (animation requires film FE) This is the styles were brought
on by people, not tech based ness and cultural rates at which were
"advanced" (for lack of better word) varied very very widely.

Music - includes instruments, singing, cultural changes, from stuff like
bards and minstels to religous music to syphonies.
Artwork - drawing, painting, scupting, architecture, etc
Dancing - maybe put with music, but i don't know...
Gaming - would include stuff from chess to uno and also sports (cuz they're
games)
Lierature - Books, poems, stories, etc. bards to novelist.

That's all i can think of off hand and if u have any ideas dont hesitate to
say.

I thought most advanced societies had castles of some sort and I know that cavalry was used by almost everyone. Middle Eastern societies were the first to use it and the West just copied the idea. A Parthian cataphract is about the same thing as a western knight, and the cataphract was developed much earlier.

I think that the best way to deal with religion is to make it a basic tech and simply rise in percentage. A certain percentage is a prerequisite for various things. That way we are not implying that one belief is more advanced or 'better' than another.
----
Anyway Tai-Chi, harmony with self/nature and way of enlightenment do for
sure as well as prob dualism and discovery of chi because these all
represent the religous thought of those places which tend to not be
montheistic (that is a western thought)
----
But that does not change the fact that all of this does not do much at all. The only thing the player gets from these techs is ninjas; aside from that it is a massive dead end. By including all of these things, you will actually make players see them as worthless. I know they are not, but in your tech tree they lead nowhere! I might be missing something, but none of these are in the prerequisite list for anything except clinic, ninja, and each other.
----
True, martial arts was also used in the primitve form called wresting in the
west. Ninjitsu is definatly orential related but if u can find a
non-specific one for this that's fine otherwise i still think we should have
it.
----
Perhaps I have not explained myself clearly enough. I do not want to put a dull cardboard tech in front of the player. The non-specific tech is simply a programming description. If the player is playing an eastern culture that player will see 'ninjitsu' and nothing else. If that player is playing a western culture, that player will see 'knighthood' and nothing else. But at the programming level, they are the same thing. If each of these is given a seperate slot on the tech tree, then the tech tree will be larger and needlessly more complex. The player might be forced to research both of them. Because they do the same thing as far as he player is concerned, they should be the same thing. But they should be given a different 'flavor' for different societies.
----
Curballi is defin a western type armor. I'm not too fam with the names
of the armor in the east and the only reason i have curballi is because it
is an improv over leather armor, but not as good as mail/plate armor...kinda
a transition.
----
As someone who really studies military history I can tell you that this difference in armor type means very little to the outcome of battles. It is true that one person in a curballi will probably defeat one person in basic leather. But military victories are rarely determined by such things. Tactics, organization, and logistics all play a far bigger role. Technology in the military only makes a signigigant difference when it allows an army to do something really new. Once again, I would recommend that such fine differences be incorporated into an 'armor' basic tech and not take up space on the tree.
----
I put katana in because it rep the best sword ever made.
----
I know that the katana is a very impressive weapon that is able to slice a machine gun in half, but I don't think it should get a special place in the tech tree for the following reasons:
1. The method of production was very expensive and time consuming. They could only be made for the wealthy. It would be almost impossible to equip an entire Clash sized army with this weapon.
2. Even if you did have an entire army equipped with the best swords ever made, your army would not be much more effective. A well organized and well led fighting force with poor weapons could easily defeat your army if your army was not as skilled. This is ignoring the fact that they could equip an army ten times the size of yours for the amount of production you spent on the katanas.

However, you are right about putting in things like the katana. It would add detail and richness ot the game. I would recommend making a 'hand to hand weapons' basic tech and have katanas be about 110% on that scale.
----
I think so. Even today you'd be surprised at how advanced things are
getting.
----
Computers are doing some amazing things, but the most advanced robots have less basic brainpower than cockroaches. The difference is that we program them to do something useful. But they cannot really go beyond their programming. The human brain has a neural network architecture that engineers cannot begin to duplicate. I recommend that we stop at Artificial Intellegence that is not really self aware.
----
...of course u know the idea of basic techs is to help
elim some non-basic techs and that's why were using them or we'd have too
many.
----
That is exactly my point. I think that most of the engineering technologies on the tech tree could be incorporated into 'basic' techs. For example, is it really necessary to give Breeding, Cellular Structure, Cloning, and Genetic Engineering their own slots? Just say that at Biology 5% you discover breeding, at 40% you discover cell structure, at 80% you discover cloning, and at 95% you learn to alter genes.

I don't know what you meant to do by putting Cloning after Genetic Engineering, but that were cloning frogs and plants in the 50's, long before they learned to alter genetic code.
----
other nations would haveto have similar
levels of network then so i'm not too sure.
----
If I wanted to, I could send data from my school's T-something line to a 600 BPS modem in an underdeveloped country.
----
but not concrete since it was a major advancement.
----
You are getting a bit too specific. The only use of concrete is that it allows you to build better things. This should be modeled by a rise in the Architecture tech.
----

Music - includes instruments, singing, cultural changes, from stuff like
bards and minstels to religous music to syphonies.
Artwork - drawing, painting, scupting, architecture, etc
Dancing - maybe put with music, but i don't know...
Gaming - would include stuff from chess to uno and also sports (cuz they're
games)
Lierature - Books, poems, stories, etc. bards to novelist.

That's all i can think of off hand and if u have any ideas dont hesitate to
say.
----
Sounds good; I didn't know you were working on it.
----
but a few major ones that really changed (or will change) society should have to be researched sep.
----
Of course, new things develop. But as soon as they develop that start to grow and improve. We have been cloning things since the 50's, but it was simple stuff and they are constantly improving it. The same thing is true of Planes. They developed as a revolutionary idea, but they had to improve it for years.

As I imagine it, new technologies are invented by smart people in our society. After they have the idea, you research to rise the percentage. For example, the Wright Brothers give you Planes 1%. You cannot build an airfleet the next turn, however. You need to build up the level to the proper amount by supporting research. This research rate is of course influenced by other techs like Engineering. A simple WW1 fighter would require Planes 10% and a bomber would need Planes 15%. After that, every new plane you make has power and range based on your Planes level. I know that you already have an Air Transportation basic tech; I am recommending making it include all airplane related things.

This should have several benefits. A player that did not care much about technology would not have to get too involved. Thay simply support research and let the numbers grow. A player that was interested in technology could ask for more detail. It would be possible to give descriptions for every 5% change in the basic tech. This technophile would get lots of messages like, "We have discovered Concrete...Our Architecture level has risen 20%." A player that didn't want such details could simply choose to turn this message off.

I will make a chart that includes all of the current techs as percentages on basic technologies or as standalone techs. Then we can discuss it in the forums. I promise that I will really work on this in detail as soon as my many final projects have been completed. I have a very rigorous school curriculum. I have been working on and studying Clash stuff, but this is a big task as I will try to have technology effects integrated into every area of the game.

PS How will Clash end? I never saw any consensus on this. Will it simply stop at a certain date, or is there some endgame like in civ games? Also, is the 1000 BC starting set in stone? I would like to start much earlier, about 6000 BC. The turns would be something reasonable like 20 years and the attacking (non-garrison) armies would be treated like airplanes.

PPS Mark, I just got your e-mail. I think this addresses your concerns about simplicity. A player could get a detailed blow-by-blow account of technical progress if he or she so desired. But others wouldn't be bothered by the excess details. Remember, some people don't really care about tech and are turned off by huge trees. Your idea seems good, but I would recommend clearly marking the starting place of the new tech. That way a player knows that they have only researched a little electronics and do not know 70% of the total sum of electronics knowledge.
You are right that players choose the tech ending point. I recommend three levels:
Modern: Current technology
Near Future: Predictable technologies that are currently being researched. The tech tree ends about 50 years in the future. I think I could do this one well.
Far Future: All the sci-fi stuff like sentient computers, psionic powers, cyborgs, cloaking devices, anything that LGJ wants to put in there

> I thought most advanced societies had castles of some sort and I know that
> cavalry was used by almost everyone. Middle Eastern societies were the
> first to use it and the West just copied the idea. A Parthian cataphract
is
> about the same thing as a western knight, and the cataphract was developed
> much earlier.

I guess now that i think about the cavalry ur right. but the castles were
nothing like european ones. Sure they had walls and has ways to defend
against them, but they weren't really fortresses like many of the castles of
europe were (until later). Nor did any of them have thick walls or much of
the traps that were like those of the european ones. They did have secret
rooms and such but no where near ad advanced (artwise maybe more so but for
practicality not really, but the practicallity is a realitve trerm). Lets
just say that a castle of european make would stand a seige in orient while
it wasn't true the other way around (except maybe japan but that's for
another reason).

> I think that the best way to deal with religion is to make it a basic tech
> and simply rise in percentage. A certain percentage is a prerequisite for
> various things. That way we are not implying that one belief is more
> advanced or 'better' than another.

I do have it as a basic tech but there are some religions determined by
historians from accross the globe that are more advanced than others. The
older "nature worship" and "shamanistic" and "ancestral" religions are
considered by a majority of historians and scolars as less advanced.
Polytheistic religions like babylonian, egyptian and greece (most so) are
more advanced. After that is tends to diverge and many religions such as
shintoism which is "nature worship" basically is also quite advanced because
it incorperates other ideas from budhism and confuscianism. Basically i
think we should keep a few in as follows:
Nature Worship (this would include shamanism and non-shamanisic religions)
Polytheism (such as greece and hinduism for more advanced version)
Monotheism (if u don't know what this means....)
Path of Enlightenment (Budhism basically)
Elemental Worship/Belief (Earth Fire Water Wind for Europe and Fire Water
Wind/Lightning for East sometimes wood and nature also.This wouldn't ness be
religion but could be)
Harmony with Nature (Tasoism and most other oriental religions)

This is certainly a chop in the religious section, but i still think chi
should be in there, though u may us "ka" also (this too is oriental in
origin though)

> Anyway Tai-Chi, harmony with self/nature and way of enlightenment do for
> sure as well as prob dualism and discovery of chi because these all
> represent the religous thought of those places which tend to not be
> montheistic (that is a western thought)
> ----
> But that does not change the fact that all of this does not do much at
all.
> The only thing the player gets from these techs is ninjas; aside from that
> it is a massive dead end. By including all of these things, you will
> actually make players see them as worthless. I know they are not, but in
> your tech tree they lead nowhere! I might be missing something, but none
of
> these are in the prerequisite list for anything except clinic, ninja, and
> each other.

First off they also affect culture. They also do produce samari (hehe) but
many other stuff. I haven't gone through and put in the details as far as
improv/units go thats why it looks like it doesn't do anything. That was my
next step when u came and helped and i would appreciate it if u could help
in that area cuz if we take out those we haveto take out monotheism to keep
things non-biased and people would wonder what happens if all u can develope
is polytheistic religions.

> True, martial arts was also used in the primitve form called wresting in
the
> west. Ninjitsu is definatly orential related but if u can find a
> non-specific one for this that's fine otherwise i still think we should
have
> it.
> ----
> Perhaps I have not explained myself clearly enough. I do not want to put
a
> dull cardboard tech in front of the player. The non-specific tech is
simply
> a programming description. If the player is playing an eastern culture
that
> player will see 'ninjitsu' and nothing else. If that player is playing a

remember were not using "eastern" or "western" cultures. Each culture
developes its own methods based on the conditions placed upon them and how
the choose to respond to them (and the player also). When u start out u
won't choose whether ur chinese or german like in the other civ games.
Instead (i'm assuming from what mark says) that u'll choose certain
modifiers to start ur culture off with or it will be randomly chosen for
each as well as where ur placed. I'm not saying what u said can't be done i
just want u to understand what is considered culture by me and mark. If u
can come with a way that's fine.

> I put katana in because it rep the best sword ever made.
> ----
> I know that the katana is a very impressive weapon that is able to slice a
> machine gun in half, but I don't think it should get a special place in
the
> tech tree for the following reasons:
> 1. The method of production was very expensive and time consuming. They
> could only be made for the wealthy. It would be almost impossible to
equip
> an entire Clash sized army with this weapon.
> 2. Even if you did have an entire army equipped with the best swords ever
> made, your army would not be much more effective. A well organized and
well
> led fighting force with poor weapons could easily defeat your army if your
> army was not as skilled. This is ignoring the fact that they could equip
an
> army ten times the size of yours for the amount of production you spent on
> the katanas.
> However, you are right about putting in things like the katana. It would
> add detail and richness ot the game. I would recommend making a 'hand to
> hand weapons' basic tech and have katanas be about 110% on that scale.

Also in a skilled hands an army equipped with melee weapons could defeat and
army with machine guns and such. Ur right about it being hard to create
though. I totally agree. But there was atleast one instances during the
"old west" of samari defeating one of the best gunslingers ever in a dual
because he was also good in martial arts and jumped behind him and stabbed
him. Of course this is a one-on-one battle, but if they are skilled enough
it could be done with an entire armies.

> ----
> I think so. Even today you'd be surprised at how advanced things are
> getting.
> ----
> Computers are doing some amazing things, but the most advanced robots have
> less basic brainpower than cockroaches. The difference is that we program
> them to do something useful. But they cannot really go beyond their
> programming. The human brain has a neural network architecture that
> engineers cannot begin to duplicate. I recommend that we stop at
Artificial
> Intellegence that is not really self aware.

Um i suggest to read a book called "The End of Work" written by a renowned
scientist/economist. I can't think of his name because i borrowed it from
the library. Your right that today most computers are quite dumb and can
only do programs that we tell them to, however there is currently one
working prototype that does learn, not like an AI learns how u play a game
and changes strategies, but actually learns like as close to a human as
possible is (ie like a Vulcan from Star Trek would, using only logic). This
project was actually started several years ago and there working on another
prototype now.

> I don't know what you meant to do by putting Cloning after Genetic
> Engineering, but that were cloning frogs and plants in the 50's, long
before
> they learned to alter genetic code.

Well i really didn't...i think i just put that if u have genetic engineering
u can get better at cloning.

> other nations would haveto have similar
> levels of network then so i'm not too sure.
> ----
> If I wanted to, I could send data from my school's T-something line to a
600
> BPS modem in an underdeveloped country.

Now u could because businesses invested there...10 years ago if we wanted to
set up a WWN we couldn't have included many of them.

> Music - includes instruments, singing, cultural changes, from stuff like
> bards and minstels to religous music to syphonies.
> Artwork - drawing, painting, scupting, architecture, etc
> Dancing - maybe put with music, but i don't know...
> Gaming - would include stuff from chess to uno and also sports (cuz
they're
> games)
> Lierature - Books, poems, stories, etc. bards to novelist.
>
> That's all i can think of off hand and if u have any ideas dont hesitate
to
> say.
> ----
> Sounds good; I didn't know you were working on it.
> ----
> but a few major ones that really changed (or will change) society should
> have to be researched sep.
> ----
> Of course, new things develop. But as soon as they develop that start to
> grow and improve. We have been cloning things since the 50's, but it was
> simple stuff and they are constantly improving it. The same thing is true
> of Planes. They developed as a revolutionary idea, but they had to
improve
> it for years.
>
> As I imagine it, new technologies are invented by smart people in our
> society. After they have the idea, you research to rise the percentage.
> For example, the Wright Brothers give you Planes 1%. You cannot build an

Actually it would be 0% and prob aircraft not planes so it could be even
more generalized because what happens when we no longer need planes but use
other aircraft?

> airfleet the next turn, however. You need to build up the level to the
> proper amount by supporting research. This research rate is of course
> influenced by other techs like Engineering. A simple WW1 fighter would
> require Planes 10% and a bomber would need Planes 15%. After that, every
> new plane you make has power and range based on your Planes level. I
know
> that you already have an Air Transportation basic tech; I am recommending
> making it include all airplane related things.

Again use that or something similar for the basic tech because as i'm seeing
it and the way thing are headed planes will soon be obsolete because they
will either be a> hybrids with helicopters b> electromatically propelled
aircraft c> hybrids with spaceshuttes. This is from some reasearch i've
been keeping track of over the years.

> This should have several benefits. A player that did not care much about
> technology would not have to get too involved. Thay simply support
research
> and let the numbers grow. A player that was interested in technology
could
> ask for more detail. It would be possible to give descriptions for every
5%
> change in the basic tech. This technophile would get lots of messages
like,
> "We have discovered Concrete...Our Architecture level has risen 20%." A
> player that didn't want such details could simply choose to turn this
> message off.

That sounds fine. Still i think they should be aware of new basic techs
reguardless.

> I will make a chart that includes all of the current techs as percentages
on
> basic technologies or as standalone techs. Then we can discuss it in the
> forums. I promise that I will really work on this in detail as soon as my
> many final projects have been completed. I have a very rigorous school
> curriculum. I have been working on and studying Clash stuff, but this is
a
> big task as I will try to have technology effects integrated into every
area
> of the game.
>
> PS How will Clash end? I never saw any consensus on this. Will it
simply
> stop at a certain date, or is there some endgame like in civ games? Also,
> is the 1000 BC starting set in stone? I would like to start much earlier,
> about 6000 BC. The turns would be something reasonable like 20 years and
> the attacking (non-garrison) armies would be treated like airplanes.

Starting date is temp set at 1000bc...this is far from set in stone. The
only ending I've seen is autoending at 2100, but i'd like to continue onward
if at all possible plus there was a *little* talk of expansions which would
take clash further into future as well as fantasy setting. This is of
course besides the point mostly for this model, but we are still keeping it
in mind when developing our stuff, esp technology.

> PPS Mark, I just got your e-mail. I think this addresses your concerns
> about simplicity. A player could get a detailed blow-by-blow account of
> technical progress if he or she so desired. But others wouldn't be
bothered
> by the excess details. Remember, some people don't really care about tech
> and are turned off by huge trees. Your idea seems good, but I would
> recommend clearly marking the starting place of the new tech. That way a
> player knows that they have only researched a little electronics and do
not
> know 70% of the total sum of electronics knowledge.
> You are right that players choose the tech ending point. I recommend
three
> levels:
> Modern: Current technology
> Near Future: Predictable technologies that are currently being
researched.
> The tech tree ends about 50 years in the future. I think I could do this
> one well.
> Far Future: All the sci-fi stuff like sentient computers, psionic powers,
> cyborgs, cloaking devices, anything that LGJ wants to put in there

Well maybe 60 for europe...70's a little high anywhere cept england.

> Basically i think we should keep a few in as follows:
> Nature Worship (this would include shamanism and non-shamanisic religions)
> Polytheism (such as greece and hinduism for more advanced version)
> Monotheism (if u don't know what this means....)
> Path of Enlightenment (Budhism basically)
> Elemental Worship/Belief (Earth Fire Water Wind for Europe and Fire Water
> Wind/Lightning for East sometimes wood and nature also.This wouldn't ness
be
> religion but could be)
> Harmony with Nature (Tasoism and most other oriental religions)
>
> This is certainly a chop in the religious section, but i still think chi
> should be in there, though u may us "ka" also (this too is oriental in
> origin though)
> ---
> These are fine, but I think they should simply be certain percentages on
the
> religion tech, modified by culture.

Well maybe for some, but they should also reflect cultures...many didn't and
still haven't atleast accepted monotheism while others had religions based
around the elements some just used them to augment there religion. Some
like path of enlightenment could be for more general purposes though.
Basically monotheism and, elemetal worship (not belief) and harmony with
nature should be carefully done for differnt cultures. I say it for the
latter also since many western religions, esp. Christianity, consider humans
need to control nature, not live in harmony with it, of course there can be
variations and even mixtures of all these i pointed out.

> I haven't gone through and put in the details as far as
> improv/units go thats why it looks like it doesn't do anything. That was
my
> next step when u came and helped and i would appreciate it if u could help
> in that area cuz if we take out those we haveto take out monotheism to
keep
> things non-biased and people would wonder what happens if all u can
develope
> is polytheistic religions.
> ---
> Once again, these techs could be wrapped into the Philosophy basic tech
and
> be a certain percentage in that tech. The level of your philosophy has an
> impact on your society.

As i refered above that's true but it doesn't needs to also address cultural
aspects as well as tech level.

> remember were not using "eastern" or "western" cultures. Each culture
> developes its own methods based on the conditions placed upon them and how
> the choose to respond to them (and the player also). When u start out u
> won't choose whether ur chinese or german like in the other civ games.
> Instead (i'm assuming from what mark says) that u'll choose certain
> modifiers to start ur culture off with or it will be randomly chosen for
> each as well as where ur placed. I'm not saying what u said can't be done
i
> just want u to understand what is considered culture by me and mark. If u
> can come with a way that's fine.
> ---
> I know that, but when I refer to culture I maen, "artistic and religious
> preference." The player chooses that at the beginning. It is like the
city
> style in civ2. It affects nothing in terms of gameplay; it just looks
> different.

Ok...so what types would we have. since this isn't too hard to impliment I'm
thinking we should have more than 4 listen in civ2 and also have other
modifiers that could affect how it looks slightly. This would also have to
be discussed in the graphics forum.

> Also in a skilled hands an army equipped with melee weapons could defeat
and
> army with machine guns and such. Ur right about it being hard to create
> though. I totally agree. But there was atleast one instances during the
> "old west" of samari defeating one of the best gunslingers ever in a dual
> because he was also good in martial arts and jumped behind him and stabbed
> him. Of course this is a one-on-one battle, but if they are skilled
enough
> it could be done with an entire armies.
> ---
> I was saying that tactics are more important than technology. The martial
> artist could have stabbed the gunslinger no matter what kind of sword he
was
> using and what kind of gun the gunslinger was using. There should be a
> Tactics basic technology that affects your armies. I am working on this
in
> more detail, but it isn't really important right now.

True, but technology is quite important. U could be the greatest tactician
ever but if ur army is equipped with bows and swords and ur enemy is
equipped with tanks, rifles and rockets ur going to loose. Sure you could
probably slow them down a lot, but unless u pumped up the tech research ur
screwed.

> however there is currently one
> working prototype that does learn, not like an AI learns how u play a game
> and changes strategies, but actually learns like as close to a human as
> possible is (ie like a Vulcan from Star Trek would, using only logic).
This
> project was actually started several years ago and there working on
another
> prototype now.
> ---
> This probably should still be in far futute, not near future. There is a
> big difference between learning and being self aware. Insects can learn
> things, but they are not intellegent.

Well we'll see how it goes.

> Now u could because businesses invested there...10 years ago if we wanted
to
> set up a WWN we couldn't have included many of them.
> ---
> World Network probably shouldn't be on the tech tree anyway. It is more
> like a social and political decision. I didn't think that through enough.

Hmm well i think it should as a "possible" implimentation or improvement
similar to the wonders in civ2, only this would require other civs to help
out.

> Actually it would be 0% and prob aircraft not planes so it could be even
> more generalized because what happens when we no longer need planes but
use
> other aircraft?
> ---
> I thought that 0% was no knowledge whatsoever. You have 0% Aircraft in
1000
> BC. I used plane as a generic aircraft name.

No 0% is no knowledge beyond the basic level. And as far as 1000 bc goes
they've begun to question that from many findings that they did have
knowlege of aircraft of some sort. FE an model airplane was found in an
egyptian tomb and it could actually fly. Somewhere in SA there was a ruins
where the site looks exactly like a rocket launching site from several years
ago, cept there's no rocket (and its made of stone), in india they have some
ruins which represent part of a starmap 128,000 years ago, yet the earliest
recorded history of civilization wasn't until 40,000 bc. The pyramids in
eqypt are also arranged in the exact same pattern. I guess i got really
carried away there, but i just hate that most places keep out this stuff cuz
it doesn't go with what they have and don't want to change history because
they might be proven wrong.

> Again use that or something similar for the basic tech because as i'm
seeing
> it and the way thing are headed planes will soon be obsolete because they
> will either be a> hybrids with helicopters b> electromatically propelled
> aircraft c> hybrids with spaceshuttes. This is from some reasearch i've
> been keeping track of over the years.
> ---
> I would consider all of those to be airplanes, at least as far as the game
> engine is concerned.

Ok so how are we going to impliment this. And how many philosophies are
there and would it be possible to mix and match from differnt philosophies
(i'm asking cuz this is very much so related to the formation of new
religions and philosophies as discussed in the social model)

> The main culture groups I can think of at the moment:
> North American Natives
> South American Natives
> African Natives
> Pacific Islanders
> Northern European (Vikings, Scandinavians, Germanic Tribes)
> Southern European (Greek, Roman, Feudal System)
> Arab (Islamic)
> Eurasian Tribes (Mongols, Scythians)
> Southeast Asia/India
> China/Japan
> If you want to change the Asian cultures, go ahead. That was just a rough
> grouping.

Some more to add:
Celtic Natives
Arab (Pre-islamic)

These should diverge somewhat later or condense FE:
Japan and China were 2 completly differnt countries do to several affects
mongolian invasion of china, japan's feudal system, but in the begining
that's fine.
SE asia is completly differnt from india in the way things should be
presented and shown
.
Also we still have to deal with what they'd look like in modern days and how
many differnt types they're be. Heres my proposal. Note that all these are
post-industial:

African Natives
Northern Europe
Southern Europe
Eastern Europe/Russia
Eastern US/E. Canada
Western US/W/NW Canada
Central/S. Americas
Arabian/Sahara Deserts
Central and Southern Africa
India
SE Asia
China
Japan
Oceana

Anyway this is just a rouge guess so feel free to edit it.

> For the near future I would include AI that can run a factory, but I think
> that emotions and sentience are a long way off. Can we agree on that
> cutoff?

Yea fully automated factories is fine.

> No 0% is no knowledge beyond the basic level.
> ---
> I was considering 1% flight the ability to get a human off the ground with
a
> powered machine. 1% is the ability to do the minimum level of something.

We'll haveto see cuz that was completly differnt from what i had.

> I don't think any of this will fit in Clash. It is too far in the past
and
> it is not documented; we don't know what really happened. I think Clash
> should start when people started recording their history. 6000 BC was
about
> the time of the first big city and the first real writing.

That's fine its just we should give ancient cultures a measure of well
diginity that they were more advanced than we were/are in some area. This
would be modeled in a loss over time. I don't think that every culture in
ancient times should be represented as it was in civ2, ie really
technologically inferior in every way. Sure they didn't have cars or planes
but they were exceellent architects, astonomers, engineers, etc. Civ2 was
made on outdated data and we know now that these cultures weren't as dumb as
we thought.

> That's why i say it should just be aircraft istead. FE would u consider a
> helicopter a plane? and if not then should a hybrid of that go with
planes
> or with helicopters? Space shuttles aren't planes so should the hybrid go
> with that or spacecraft? That ones trickier. But having aircraft only
will
> allow us to put blimps, hot air balloons, etc in there also.
> ---
> Sorry I wasn't being clear. I was using plane to mean any heavier than
air
> craft that uses fixed wings to provide lift. I think that hovering craft
> should be an entirely different technology. From a military tactics
> standpoint there are things you can do with helocopters that you simply
> cannot do with planes. Lumping them into one category would erase that
> distinction.
> The hybrid cutoff is based on what the thing can do. If it can hover for
> extended periods of time it goes with Hovering Flight. If not it goes
with
> Powered Flight. If it goes into space it is an aspect of Space Flight.

Okay what if it could go in space, but not to orbit, but just for better
speed between cities? And hovering a helicopter or rotaty-bladed hovering
isn't the same as electro-magnetic hovering.

> As for balloons, I would recommend that Lighter than Air Flight is also a
> seperate technology.

So how many do we have then?

Some things on the basic tech chart would also require seperate things being
discovered that wouldn't be learned on the basic techs as they progress (ie
the major breakthroughs in history that mark was talking about)
---
I was planning on including that. Foe Example, You can never get Ships
beyond a certain level if you don't have Steel Working.

African Natives -OK
Northern Europe -OK
Southern Europe -OK
Eastern Europe/Russia -I forgot them.
Eastern US/E. Canada -?
Western US/W/NW Canada -How are these two really different?
Central/S. Americas -OK
Arabian/Sahara Deserts -OK
Central and Southern Africa -How is this different from African Natives?
India -OK
SE Asia -OK
China -
Japan -In terms of art and religion, Japanese and Chinese cultures are very similar; or close enough at the macro level.
Oceana -Pacific Islanders?

Ok I'll wait and see when its done...Any idea since i know this is really my
last week as to when that might be the case?

> Some more to add:
> Celtic Natives
> Arab (Pre-islamic)
> ---
> Arabs developed Islam just as Europeans developed Christianity. They were
> still the same people. This culture group would develop Islam eventually,
> just as Oriental cultures would develop Chi aftr a while.
> I think that making Celts seperate is too much detail. I would consider
> them part of the Northern European group that also includes vikings,
> germanic tribes, etc. If we had a seperate culture for every tribe like
> that there would be thousands of cultures. For example, Thai and
Vietmanese
> are different in more ways than Celts and Vikings are different.

Actually, no, not really before Christinaity most of Europe was either
Greeko-Roman or Germanic-like. Same was true for arabia and Islam.

> These should diverge somewhat later or condense FE:
> Japan and China were 2 completly differnt countries do to several affects
> mongolian invasion of china, japan's feudal system, but in the begining
> that's fine.
> ---
> Remember that I consider government to be independent of culture in this
> context.

If its art ur talking about that's okay, but culturally they were vastly
diff.

> SE asia is completly differnt from india in the way things should be
> presented and shown
> ---
> You're right.

> Also we still have to deal with what they'd look like in modern days and
how
> many differnt types they're be. Heres my proposal. Note that all these
are
> post-industial:
>
> African Natives -OK
> Northern Europe -OK
> Southern Europe -OK
> Eastern Europe/Russia -I forgot them.
> Eastern US/E. Canada -?
> Western US/W/NW Canada -How are these two really different?
> Central/S. Americas -OK
> Arabian/Sahara Deserts -OK
> Central and Southern Africa -How is this different from African Natives?
> India -OK
> SE Asia -OK
> China -
> Japan -In terms of art and religion, Japanese and Chinese cultures are
very
> similar; or close enough at the macro level.
> Oceana -Pacific Islanders?

If u've lived in one side of the US and the other you'll see a drastic diff.
In the way people live. Out in the west, cept along coast, people are much
more spread out and have diff values in many places which go against
enviroemental ways also. In the east there are many more cities and roads
and the lifestyle is completely diff.

Art is the same basically. Religion for modern day China/Japan isn't. Its
almost compeletly diff as can be. China is still rooted very much to its
old ways cept for Christianity and Japan has embraced secularism and ways of
US cept for Christianity and Islam. They still have things like Christmas
(secular reason) and some psudeo-Christian/Shintoism type religions, but its
not the same (2% total pop.) so in terms of modern day Japan is both a
western and eastern country which is why it needs its own i think for modern
times, maybe not ancient. Then again Japan was the only country to have
samari and ninja types. China, Korea, Mongolia, etc didn't. Anyway it
doesn't really matter for the latter if its just artwise and religion wise
ur talking about.

> We'll haveto see cuz [1% vs. 0%] was completly differnt from what i had.
> ---
> Could you elaborate?

0% in my terms would be the very basic knowledge of what is ness to know
that basic tech. 100% would be double basic knowledge. It won't appear
until u've got the related techs ness to develope them so ur right when u
say a lot of things will be at 0%, but they will not even show up as
possible so in essence its like saying there at -1% or something. I'm
assuming for urs 100% is equal to modern times since 1% is ness for any
implimentation.

> That's fine its just we should give ancient cultures a measure of well
> diginity that they were more advanced than we were/are in some area. This
> would be modeled in a loss over time. I don't think that every culture in
> ancient times should be represented as it was in civ2, ie really
> technologically inferior in every way. Sure they didn't have cars or
planes
> but they were exceellent architects, astonomers, engineers, etc. Civ2 was
> made on outdated data and we know now that these cultures weren't as dumb
as
> we thought.
> ---
> It is true that ancient cultures often did very well with what they had,
but
> the simple fact is that we have far more. Consider astronomy. Ancient
> astronomers did amazing things, considering they only had eyesight and
> simple math. But that does not change the fact that we know far more than
> they did about every aspect of the skies. We simply have better
technology
> to look at and analyze the stars, and as a result we know more than they
did
> by a factor of millions.
> When it comes to things like art I totally agree. I would put almost any
> ancient culture at 150% of modern ability in the Fine Arts.

Yes we have progressed far more so than many of the ancient cultures. But
that was only recently, 1800s or somewhere around then. There are still a
few things they were higher at than were still are (such as the egyptians
and their tech related to sound), but that's not relivant to this model i
don't think. Basically up until near the end of Rome in the west and very
ancient times in India and about 800 or so in China was when things were
still remembered. As far as art goes this was true of many cities in
ancient times, but maybe not quite that high, with a few exceptions.

> Okay what if it could go in space, but not to orbit, but just for better
> speed between cities? And hovering a helicopter or rotaty-bladed hovering
> isn't the same as electro-magnetic hovering.
> ---
> If the purpose of something is move from point A to point B on Earth, then
> it would be Powered Flight.
> How are helicopter really different from EM hovercrafts? They do the same
> thing. We have propellers, jets, and stealth all lumped into the one
> technology of Powered Flight, so why is this different enough to be
> seperate?

EM propulsion is vastly diff. It uses a whole different way of keeping
above ground, propelling and movement. Proppeller like craft keep
themselves up by esentially trying to lighten themselves by wind currents so
they can take off and keep them spinning to continue movement. EM
propulsion uses the eletro-magnetic spectrum to "charge" the craft with
energy which can repel it off of the surface like opposite magnets. The
charge has to be maintained, but the way its done is so fundamentally diff
than any other way we've tried to fly.

> So how many do we have then?
> ---
> Powered Flight, Hover Flight, and Lighter than Air Flight.

> Well i meant that in this case steel working wouldn't be linked with an
> instant discovery based on metallurgy tech level but would have to be
> reasearched seperatly. Also i think u should be careful on how u limit
the
> advancement of ships and others since even today we're improving the
quality
> of these ships (mainly for sports and leisure, but it would still be
> practical if the tech levels wouldn't have changed)
> ---
> I would consider the very first Steel working to be Metal Working of maybe
> 35%. They had steel weapons around 100 BC. After that it slowly
increased
> until they were able to use steel for many more things. There was no
single
> revolutionary thing except maybe the Bessemer Process. And the result of
> that would be equivalent of raising Metal Working about 10% at most.
> Technology usually does not advance in huge leaps. It increases as a
result
> of people slowly improving things over many years.
> With the limiting factors, I was thinking more in terms of soft
> prerequisites. After you get ships of X%, it becomes harder to increase
> them. The difficulty increases the farther you advance beyond that
> percentage.