Announcement

**LOGO** · January 13, 2000, 05:18

I'm not a "team member" but I have a couple ideas, or ideas I've heard. I've heard some ideas about having "research groups" to conduct research rather then just magical researchers who center on one tech, you could have a research group as a unit then plant them at cities. Then you could build improvements on the city to help the researchers. In the beginning they will be very all-purpose but as you get more advanced you are forced to upgrade to much more specialised sciences like nuclear physics or architecture (by the way there should be a tech like "sky scraper" for big cities to for) for specialised labs. You would have to fund these researchers and their labs, you would also need to build universities to train them like military units. The benefit of this is you could move them in times of invasion or transfer them all into one city of technology (it could happen). I don't know if this sounds like micro-management to you but it's an idea and I hope you atleast consider it, oh by the way I think the benefit of this is you would have a new system of strategy by telling differant groups to research mulitipal techs or one at once (a couple biologists at once for humane genome) it should also add bonuses to certain wonders e.g. architects could be assigned to the pyrimids.

**Mark_Everson** · January 13, 2000, 12:51

LGJ:

Can you at least give us a text list of the techs you have in the new model? I think its a Huge waste of everyone's time for them to submit to you long lists of technologies required when in fact you probably already have 90-95% of them in there...

On Culture. I have not heard from Manurein, or gotten a response to an email I sent him about a month ago. I suspect we are on our own. I will try to come up with a list in the next few days. Feel free to bug me if the time goes by and I still haven't produced

**Lord God Jinnai** · January 13, 2000, 17:02

Basically check the currently posted tech model first. After that send anything that u think should be up there that isn't. Don't worry too much on military combat, but don't let that stop u either if u wanted to post something on that. What we are really looking for is way to combine several of the social advances into basic techs, but except for religion and perhaps psychology neither me nor rich currently have any ideas.

Also if u have any future tech ideas (near or far) post them, however try not to base it too much off of popular TV shows, movies, etc. I've only made one exception and that's with psychohistory (Isaac Asimov'f Foundation series) because it is now offically considered a type of science. More general ideas are okay, but nothing like Dylithium Crystals or Death Stars.

Also Mark u have a few days since i won't be posting it till after i get some help from my former Eastern Civ. teacher next wednesday.
[This message has been edited by Lord God Jinnai (edited January 13, 2000).]

**Harlikwin** · January 13, 2000, 18:58

Hiya. I'm the new Mil Model Lead...
I havent had a chance to take a real detailed look at the tech tree/web so I can't make too much commentary on that yet. But I would like to see something like the alpha centuri model for reaserch i.e. reaserch a specific group of things and have the outcome be somewhat random. I'm also in favor of being able to reaserch several things at once. Well, thats my two cents on that. In terms of military tech, we are tenativley going with a dual model of technology and organization and leadership to determine combat. So something like tactics/orgainzation technologies are a good idea. Also some supply techs or something would be a good idea. I'll get back to you once I take a good look at what you have already got.

-Harlikwin

**Harlikwin** · January 14, 2000, 17:40

Ok, Currently I still really cannot comment too much on military techonology since we don't even have a unit list. But currently the units are looking like combined arms forces/armies.

Anyway I do however have some problems with the current model. I do not mean to be overly critical but you seem to put way to much emphasis on feudal japanese technologies, ala the samurai, katana, and ninjitsu. Personally I do not feel that these technologies had any real impact on any civilization other than the Japanese. Also you are probably under the delusion that the samurai was the culmination of swordsmanship. As both a Kendo and Iai-Jutsu practioner (katna swordsmanship) I would have to disagree historically speaking, raipers were more lethal than the katana. In fact protugese sailors considered it unsportsmanlike to chalange samurai to duels due to the inferiority of the Katana to the Rapier. I would like to point out that this is mainly in terms of the way the weapons were used, the Katana being a cutting weapon, while the raiper is a puncture weapon. Anyway what I propose is this. Drop the Katana etc techs. But create an advanced swordsmanship tech that would cover highly evolved forms of sword combat, ala the samuria and the fencer.

Also in terms of the Handgun technologies, these were pretty much concurent with rifle level fireams that were made at the same time, and as such I just vote to amalgamate them into the rifle sized firearms.

I also vote to get rid of Muskets or Flint lock rifles since for all practical purposes they are the same thing (I know they were matchlocks first, but in terms of game effects it would be identical)

Also the Siege engine and Catapult dichotomy seems again too overspecialized. I vote to amalgamte them or if you want a technical diference divide them into Torsion based and gravity based siege engines.

Umm.. We also need to incorporate communications techs into the military units but that will have to wait until we actually have some units...

Thats it for now

-Harli

**Mark_Everson** · January 16, 2000, 19:26

LGJ

Here is my best guess on cultural attributes. I took some from the list in the social model thread, and added a few of my own that I think our useful for the economy and government models. We might need to prove in this list a bit, and I'm sure I've missed a few things also. Anyway, I think most of these things are fairly self-explanatory. I will give a brief explanation if I think it's necessary.

nationalism/provincialism
authority acceptance
traditionalism
cultures view of best type of government
cultures view of what occupations are best/most noble and worst (for figuring where your best and brightest go)
desire to invest
compassion for the poor
militarism
asceticism

Hope this is what you are looking for!

Mark

**Lord God Jinnai** · January 17, 2000, 01:11

Are all of these based one numbers? Its essential for the math part for figuring out how much each percentage level costs.

**Mark_Everson** · January 17, 2000, 17:57

LGJ:

i don't get what you mean by "based one numbers"? If you mean based on numbers, does it need to be a single number? Obviously the cultures view of what occupations are best will be a series of occupations, perhaps each with a number associated. If that doesn't answer your question you're going to have to give me a better description of what you need.

**Lord God Jinnai** · January 17, 2000, 18:28

nationalism/provincialism
authority acceptance
traditionalism
desire to invest
compassion for the poor
militarism
asceticism

a number say 1-100 1 being provincial totally, 100 being nationalism. This is just an example and any range will do.

cultures view of best type of government
cultures view of what occupations are best/most noble and worst (for figuring where your best and brightest go)

This would have to have some type of number scale similar to the one above however what range is what is up to u.

**Mark_Everson** · January 17, 2000, 19:25

Okay, most of them will indeed be on a 0-100 scale. Nationalism and provincialism will each have their own scale of this sort. The only link between them will be that they are some can't exceed 100. So in the start of the game both nationalism and provincialism will tend to be fairly low. Provincialism will tend to rise first, and then be eclipsed by nationalism in the age of nations. I'd envision the U.S. today as having something like nationalism 85%, provincialism 10%.

The cultures view of the best type of government simply does not fit within your scheme. This will be a multidimensional characteristic stating on average the people's preference for a particular form of government. Why don't you just skip it for now.

The cultures view of what occupations are best, will be a scale that divides up 100 points between a variety of potential occupations like Farmer, soldier, merchant, etc.. This is very important to work into the tech model IMO. It will describe the areas that the people in the civilization are most interested in improving. This will actually be a bit tricky, since there is a tie in with traditionalism. If a particular occupation is high on the social scale, but the society is very traditional, there may be very little interest in improving and because it is already "perfect the way it is". I'd like to hear what you think about how to handle this right.

**Lord God Jinnai** · January 17, 2000, 20:32

Here's the basic idea i have for the formula:
Output RP=CL+1 x ((P x CL) + ((M - P + 1) / CL))

RP=Reseach points
CL=Current tech level
P=social percentage
M=Max social level

The 2 with rp calculations can be done multiple times.

The "P x RP" refers to cultural tendancies that would disagree with that tech while the "(M - P + 1) / CL" refers to those cultural tendancies that would help in researching that part tech.
[This message has been edited by Lord God Jinnai (edited January 17, 2000).]

**Mark_Everson** · January 17, 2000, 22:04

Can you give me an example with some faked up numbers? And can you define max social level? And it looks to me like both of the rightmost terms increase output (unless M - P+ 1 is negative), so how is it that one helps and one hurts?

You should know better than to tease a physicist with an incomplete model

**Lord God Jinnai** · January 17, 2000, 23:06

actually ur right. I had 2 models orginally and they kinda got mixed together.

it should be:
RP = ((P x (CL + 1)) + ((M - P + 1) / (CL + 1))
Max social level is whatever number (usually 100 from what u said) is the highest that particular part of the cultural model can reach.

So for example agriculture is at 10%

and for simplicities sake we just use 2 modifieres, one that benifits and one that doesn't. The max value is 100. The one that benifits is 30 and the one that hinders is at 50.

RP = ((50 x (10 + 1)) + ((100 - 30 + 1) / (10 + 1))

Thus we end up with 556.454545... We will always round up so it would be 557. This is just a quick shot i threw together to give u an idea of how it would work so it needs a lot of refining, but i hope u get the idea.

**Mark_Everson** · January 18, 2000, 22:24

LGJ:

You still haven't told me what RP is... is in research points generated, or research points needed? From the fact that you say that 50 hinders the technology it leads me to believe it is the latter. If you'd like to just tell me in words what exactly your looking for, I can make up a good formula for you. Yours has the obvious defect that as the technology level moves toward 100 your second term will become very small compared to the first. So cultural benefits toward technological research will go away as we approach modern world?? To be fair, I know you said it was very rough

Announcement

Tech/Social Advances - All Model leaders respond PLZ!!!! (anyone else can too)

Tech/Social Advances - All Model leaders respond PLZ!!!! (anyone else can too)

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment