TECHNOLOGY(v2.1)- hosted by SnowFire

[ember]

For modern techs this is a good idea.
For ancient it doesn't make sense.
Did the europeans have a theory of gunpowder or of gravity, to make muskettes or catpults?
This, if implimented for modern times, could slow down the tech speed during modern times, when it gets a bit riddicoulus, but leave it the same in ancient times.

------------------
"Any technology, sufficiently advanced,
is indistinguishable from magic"
-Arthur C. Clark

[Jon Miller]

hi all

look at my theoretical vrs applications ideas in technology 2.0

even long ago technology was devided into theory and applications

often long ago though, inventors would stumble onto the application and then learn the theory from it

the reason why we don't know (besides the greeks) many examples of ancient discovery of theories is that not much was kept track of, we don't know who made the first applications either but we know arround what time they were made because that it when we first saw them being used

you don't see theories being used (often some other theory is missing, or insight, that makes it so that the applications that could be done with it), also in ancient times people would far more often stumble on the application before the theory

also, we do NOT have a workable theory for FTL now

we have numerious ideas of how it could work but I would classify it under speculations (partly because there are theories that have far more observational evidence that disprove the FTL theories)

a workable theory must keep up with all observations

an example: Newtons and Einsteins theories are both workable

but Einsteins is more workable (works in more situations) then Newtons

many of the FTL theories there is not enough evidence for them to be proved or disproved so therefore they should not included in the game

for Newtons observations (and those of Newtons time) his theory was proved, as was Einsteins (but now we know that that is not completely correct either

please, no Startrek or Smac tech

I am not saying that any FTL theory is false, I'm just saying that none are proved (as Einsteins and Newtons were) at this time and should not be considered to

Jon Miller

[Jimmy]

I never said that I wanted FTL to be included in civ3. I am opposed to any Star Trek tech, as you put, in this game. I was merely using FTL as an example from real life of theory which might some day become reality and in doing so, the truth that some techs are divided into theory and application.

[Jon Miller]

sorry, I've heard some who do wish tech loke that in civ

the truth is that all technology has both theorerical and application components

many theoretical discoveries are part of numerous applications and many applications are based of several theories

Jon Miller

[SnowFire]

Can I ask for some clarification? How, if at all, are your ideas different from 2.11, Concepts vs. Applications? It's not like I'm going to take it out of the list, but if you have any further ideas on how this could be implemented...

[Jimmy]

I just reread 2.11 Concepts Vs. Application and indeed my idea is pretty much the same thing. I guess this will teach me to read those summaries more often to make sure that I am not reposting an idea which is already accepted.

[SnowFire]

I think we have a pretty good list so far, but there's always that one extra refinement to add. Anyone have any new ideas/extrapolations on old ones in the summary? Speak now, or forever hold your peace... the summary's being sent soon.

[Theben]

I'll be by tommorrow or the next day with a long post, so don't get too comfortable...

[Theben]

Post 1, post 2 might be Monday instead of tommorrow...

There needs to be a standardization of how SE effects, Improvements, and Technology interact. These are my ideas on how they'd work:

ECONOMY would be a % that is added/subtracted from trade.
EFFICIENCY: A % reduction/increase in corruption(/waste?) in the city.
SUPPORT: Each city would have a base SUPPORT % (10-20%?). This % is subtracted (added if a - value) from the combined cost of all maintenance of units (units would have production & money support costs, possibly food too). SE choices increase/decrease the % modifier.
MORALE should different than the EXPERIENCE bonuses provided to units. Morale would be a small % bonus/penalty independent of Experience, but does combine with it to influence combat. FE, in SMAC, if you attack from a city w/ a Children's Creche you get +25% to attack, or you can have your % modifier's halved due to low Morale. This is Morale. Experience is the actual level of troop prepardness, training, etc. Experience affects att/def/LASS strength but Morale affects att/def/LASS AND Experience.
EXPERIENCE: Only a minimal bonus/penalty should be possible with this SE. Most experience should come from training (and this only to a point; maybe up to hardened as SMAC?) & actual combat (all the way to elite status). Again, a % would be applied as in SMAC, but it would be in smaller increments.
POLICE represents the controls you can exert on your people. It adds to your
happiness rating after all other happiness factors have been applied, but cannot increase happiness to a positive rating.
GROWTH is affected by happiness and many other factors, including food. It's a % increase/decrease in the city's growth rate.
ENVIRONMENT: A % reduction/increase in pollution output. At certain (+) levels it can add a % to trade from wilderness squares, however a Environment SE choice should also be accompanied by a loss of Economy & Growth.
SECURITY: A % bonus/penalty to enemy espionage missions that affect you.
ESPIONAGE: A % bonus/penalty to your espionage missions.
DIPLOMACY: A % bonus/penalty to your Reputation vs. other civs.
INDUSTRY is so powerful and easily abused in SMAC it should not have any SE modifiers. It may only be modified by technology & City Improvements, as a % bonus(/penalty?) to a city's Resource and Labor output.
RESEARCH: as SMAC, but with smaller % increments.
HAPPINESS as described by me elsewhere.

These are the Civil Effects-CE (plus any others that you may wish to add). Each +1 or -1 correlates to a +5% or -5% change in the total of the related CE, with the exception of Happiness, +/- 2%, because it is so powerful. At certain levels each category may have other special abilities (like immunity to spy bribes; PROBE in SMAC). How they interact:

Social Engineering: As per SMAC; each SE has +/- to several CEs.
Technology: Usually adds +'s to 1 or more CE's, but may penalize some.
City Improvements: Depends on method used. If like civ2, each building adds a large amount to it's CE(s); i.e. a marketplace would add +10 to Economy & Happiness (+50%). If like Star Trek: Birth of the Federation, each building adds +1, +2, or +3 (or -) to it's given category, and you build several buildings of each type in each city (obviously at a lower cost than now).

In the SE screen you could see your civ's overall effectiveness in each category (as SMAC). In addition, each city would need a button that would pop up a window, showing what it's own CE modifiers are.
My reason for posting this here is not to influence people to my SE ideas-there are enough posts in the SE thread as is-but to have other's input on how these 3 things should interact, and because technology has a large influence in this.

[Maniac]

Theben :

Marketplace : +5 Tax (and of course + 50% luxuries)
Library : +5 Research
Courthouse : +2 Happiness, +2 Efficiency
Barracks : +2 Experience
...

About Growth. You seem very fond with the idea that happiness should affect population growth directly.
I think it should affect growth indirectly, that is by an im/emigration system.

A small idea :

In CivX the # science icons needed to research a technology was based on how many techs you already had.
I would change it.
The # science icons needed to research a tech should be based on how many techs you DISCOVERED YOURSELF.
So techs acquired by stealing, trading or goodie huts are not taken in account.
I always hated that trading or goodie huts (things that are supposed to be good) slowed my research by eg 30 turns.
This little modification could solve that.

[loinburger]

Research Inertia: This is in addition to my post several weeks ago stating that different tech fields should be "opposed to," "slightly related to," or "related to" each other, the example being that Math + Physics is "related to" Economy but "opposed to" Agriculture, so that shifting scientists from working on Math+Physics to Agriculture will accrue more penalties to your research than if you were to shift those same scientists to Economy.

Well, here's the idea. If you're researching 5 techs at once (I favor the separation of research into 5 categories as put forth in the summary) with 5 different teams of scientists of varying sizes, then there should be some "research spillage" from one category to another depending on how related the categories are (or the specific techs). So research in a category will help research in related categories. This is to simulate your scientists talking to each other and saying "Hey Bob! Jack here has a flying machine that he's going to bomb the Commies with! I'll bet we can make a crop duster out of it when he's done!"

A sample algorithm which can be used to determine research spillage is (everything is in percentages):
(% of total research being dedicated towards tech field) + ((% of total research being dedicated towards "related" tech fields) x .50 (% of total research being dedicated towards tech field)) + ((% of total research being dedicated towards "slightly related" tech fields) x .20 x (% of total research being dedicated towards tech field)). This means that concentrating all of your research on one end of the research spectrum will cause those techs to be developed that much faster. For example, if Johnnio the Civ Player dedicates 50% of his research towards Math + Physics and 50% towards Economy (related fields, in my example), then he will receive (50% + .50 x .50 x .50) = 62.5% of his research points in each field. But if Johnnio decides to dedicate 50% of his research towards Math + Physics and 50% towards Agriculture (opposing, in my example), then he will receive (50% + 0 x .50 x .50) = 50% of his research points in each field, since they aren't related.

Add to this sample algorithm another multiplier which is determined by which era you're in: ancient, renaissaince, modern, post-modern (if this game goes futuristic, my fingers are crossed). Ancient gets the full research spillage bonus, Renaissaince gets a x.80 modifier, modern gets a x.50 modifier, and post-modern gets a x.10 modifier. This will speed up ancient research relative to future research, and is meant to simulate the fact that the ancients had Renaissaince Men while we have true Specialists, complete with Ph.D's.

ADDITIONALLY (I'm winding down here ) there has been talk about how powerful the Math + Physics research field would be. I have provided a solution which would make MAth + Physics research more difficult: just make every field "slightly related to" or "opposed to" Math + Physics research. In a way this is realistic since most Math + Physics advances will be/are so abstract(Gauss might have figured out imaginary numbers, but it took electrical engineers several centuries to figure out that they represented electricity). That way, there will be little "research spillage" into Math + Physics, and few other research fields will benefit from pumping research into Math + Physics.

[Jon Miller]

Quick post

I think that techs should be slowed based on time not number

Jon Miller

[Maniac]

"I think that techs should be slowed based on time not number"

That will cause the AI to get behind in research even more.

[Jon Miller]

why should we prop up useless AI

make the AI right

they should be able to do it by now

slow down research

I do not want even good players getting to alphacentauri before AD (could be done in either civ or civ2 don't remember which)

Jon Miller

[Maniac]

No, Jon Miller, research shouldn't be slowed down.
It's not the speed of tech discovery that caused players to get on AC before 1 AD (seemed to be possible in both Civ1 and 2.)
I thought, to do that, you had to play ICS.
THAT problem has to be solved.
So, if you really want to slow down research (although that's not the problem), there is an option to do that in SMAC customize rules. Guess the option will exist too in Civ3.