Tweet
One problem of tech advance is that you always get from a unit X to a unit Y without anything between (while in reality it really makes a difference: F22 vs F14, M16 vs UZI, Abram M1 vs first tanks...). No advance between them for gameplay's sakes, too much details in a tech tree beeing a problem. Soo....
I thought maybe units should advance considering the money you've put in something called "intermediary technology". Here's how it works:
You put a certain % of your revenues into this thing and it gives bonus to your units. It also advances by itself with not a penny in it, but of course slower. The costs includes research (if any), production and all. The results would be a added % of victory, not necessarily +1def or +1att.
I think this system is easy to use, simple and efficient.
Real life examples:
Is this valid only in modern era? No. Waterloo battle (around 1810) had different guns, carbines, etc. The English troops could shoot twice as the French. Or there's also these new guns that were shooting from further in American Independance War, but were shooting at a slower rythm; it was added in armies later as a good complementary unit. Difference? Serious advantages. USA lost almost no tank (less than 10 tanks) while Saddam lost many many tanks (hundreds? Don't remember) partly because of more adapted tanks (M1).
I thought maybe units should advance considering the money you've put in something called "intermediary technology". Here's how it works:
You put a certain % of your revenues into this thing and it gives bonus to your units. It also advances by itself with not a penny in it, but of course slower. The costs includes research (if any), production and all. The results would be a added % of victory, not necessarily +1def or +1att.
I think this system is easy to use, simple and efficient.
Real life examples:
Is this valid only in modern era? No. Waterloo battle (around 1810) had different guns, carbines, etc. The English troops could shoot twice as the French. Or there's also these new guns that were shooting from further in American Independance War, but were shooting at a slower rythm; it was added in armies later as a good complementary unit. Difference? Serious advantages. USA lost almost no tank (less than 10 tanks) while Saddam lost many many tanks (hundreds? Don't remember) partly because of more adapted tanks (M1).