Technology System E-Mail Archive

[Richard Bruns]

First off before I reply to your other questions I seen nothing i medicine
that reflects the eastern or native american approach to this basic tech:
***
Medicine
Medicines, Surgery, Vaccine, Artificial Limb
0%-No Prerequisite-10%-Biology(*10%)-80%-Genetics(*80%)-100%
0%-Biology-100%
Higher levels make people live longer and be healthier and happier
***
Is this a mistake, intentional or are you modeling some other way? The
reason is, is because if we are going to have this non-biased to one
cultural type or another as much as humanly possible, which is one thing I
won't comprime on, this represnts mainly a western philosophy.
---
I don't understand how this is biased. You can get up to 10% with no biology knowledge at all; this represents herbal cures and trial and error. After that you have to have some basic biology knowledge to heal people. If I left something out, it was because I don't know about it. Was there some helper tech I forgot? I don't want to leave anyone out; I just don't know what I am leaving out.
---
I have no argument with that last statement and i fact think it should,
again the exact percentages/techs may vary. In general if you can think of
something that isn't a tech advancement or social advancement but is
important, it prob belongs in this category. FE automobiles do, but
automotive technology or whatever u think it should be called wouldn't fit
there.
---
Automobiles are simply a big jump in the Land Transport Devices technology. The percentage of this tech affects the mobility of your people.
---
Again with that I'll try and have some ideas for you when i send what i can
compile with the rest of the stuff. You will prob haveto do a lot with the
more currect militay items/improvements since i know more about the older
military battling systems.
---
OK
---
That's fine, but we still have to have an end point i mean otherwise we
could end up with an intiger that never ends (6.66666...). Also if we do
use intigers we might want to do a little more tweaking with the model later
on. FE having a requirement at 29.3 or something. Again don't worry right
now that's for play testing.
---
I was thinking two decimal places for the cutoff (6.67) But there could also be programming concerns. Different variable definitions allow you do do different things and take up different amounts of memory. So a programmer will have to give their input on this.
---
And "Construction Materials" doesn't how? I know you mentioned the fact
that this doesn't include metal constuction materials (as well as wood) but
can you think of a better name?
---
When I think of construction materials I think of wood, brick, and steel. Someone might put a lot of effort into Construction Materials trying to get skyscrapers, and then wonder why they can't build them. Skyscrapers require an entirely different construction material than the one this tech involves. And besides, the primary use of these things will be paving roads.
---
Yes, yes. But gunpowder is a major discovery, not up there with agriculture
or the wheel, but definatly moreso than something like copper working and
many others.
---
In my model, Copper Working is one small part of Metalworking. Likewise, Gunpowder is a small part of Chemistry. At about Chemistry 20%, the player discovers gunpowder.

I think that one of your concerns with my model is that it is not specific enough about applications. And you do have a good point. I have an idea that might address your concerns without much more complexity.

We add a few "Application Techs." These are not part of the tree and are completely independent of other techs. They might even use a different RP pool. These Application Techs deal with the way that the basic techs are used. For example, consider Military Applications. This tech is required to build military items. If you don't research it, you don't get military applications even if you have the proper percentage of the basic tech. All applications get a new prerequisite, such as:
Crossbow: Mechanical Engineering *25%, Military Applications 30%
Musket: Chemistry *30%, Metalworking *30%, Military Applications 40%
If you don't go for miltary applications, you can research more civilian applications and improve your economy, like the Chinese did. They never got guns because they didn't focus on military applications like the Europeans did.

This is just an idea. What do you think?

[Richard Bruns]

> First off before I reply to your other questions I seen nothing i medicine
> that reflects the eastern or native american approach to this basic tech:
> ***
> Medicine
> Medicines, Surgery, Vaccine, Artificial Limb
> 0%-No Prerequisite-10%-Biology(*10%)-80%-Genetics(*80%)-100%
> 0%-Biology-100%
> Higher levels make people live longer and be healthier and happier
> ***
> Is this a mistake, intentional or are you modeling some other way? The
> reason is, is because if we are going to have this non-biased to one
> cultural type or another as much as humanly possible, which is one thing I
> won't comprime on, this represnts mainly a western philosophy.
> ---
> I don't understand how this is biased. You can get up to 10% with no
> biology knowledge at all; this represents herbal cures and trial and
error.
> After that you have to have some basic biology knowledge to heal people.
If
> I left something out, it was because I don't know about it. Was there
some
> helper tech I forgot? I don't want to leave anyone out; I just don't know
> what I am leaving out.

In the beginning its not, but it doesn't include the "alternative" methods
most of the "western" mdeical field considers primitive which with now that
research has been done has a lot more credibility to it than once thought by
most of the western scientific community.

I'll reply with the rest later

--- New Mail ---

> That's fine, but we still have to have an end point i mean otherwise we
> could end up with an intiger that never ends (6.66666...). Also if we do
> use intigers we might want to do a little more tweaking with the model
later
> on. FE having a requirement at 29.3 or something. Again don't worry
right
> now that's for play testing.
> ---
> I was thinking two decimal places for the cutoff (6.67) But there could
> also be programming concerns. Different variable definitions allow you do
> do different things and take up different amounts of memory. So a
> programmer will have to give their input on this.

The amount of memory shouldn't be too much if we tell it to store it at a
max of 2 decimal places.

> And "Construction Materials" doesn't how? I know you mentioned the fact
> that this doesn't include metal constuction materials (as well as wood)
but
> can you think of a better name?
> ---
> When I think of construction materials I think of wood, brick, and steel.
> Someone might put a lot of effort into Construction Materials trying to
get
> skyscrapers, and then wonder why they can't build them. Skyscrapers
require
> an entirely different construction material than the one this tech
involves.
> And besides, the primary use of these things will be paving roads.

Well do u have a better name? I would say masonry, but i really don't think
so.

> We add a few "Application Techs." These are not part of the tree and are
> completely independent of other techs. They might even use a different RP
> pool. These Application Techs deal with the way that the basic techs are
> used. For example, consider Military Applications. This tech is required
> to build military items. If you don't research it, you don't get military
> applications even if you have the proper percentage of the basic tech.
All
> applications get a new prerequisite, such as:
> Crossbow: Mechanical Engineering *25%, Military Applications 30%
> Musket: Chemistry *30%, Metalworking *30%, Military Applications 40%
> If you don't go for miltary applications, you can research more civilian
> applications and improve your economy, like the Chinese did. They never
got
> guns because they didn't focus on military applications like the Europeans
> did.

I had a slightly diff idea, but it may be able to be incorperated somehow
with mine. Each item, tech, improv whatever has the basic tech min prereq.
However just because you meet them doesn't mean u automatically learn them.
FE the Native Americans had enough mechanical knowledge to create the wheel,
but outside of children's toys they didn't impliment it because it didn't
help them. The Chinese are even more famous for things like this. They
were actually the first to invent the car, but because no one cared or had
any use for it and also because they didn't keep records like western
scientist did, they aren't credited with it. Thus they would have met the
prereqistes in both cases, but the culture didn't have need of it for some
reason or another so in order to be "discovered" there must be a demand of
some sort. This will have to be worked out carefully with the
social/cultural model as well as other models such as geography, military,
etc.

Anyway how could this tie in with your idea? Well instead of adding yet
another type of tech the items, improvements, basic a techs, specific techs,
social techs, etc all will be affected by the cultural parameters, instead
of just the basic techs. In order to get certain things the first and most
important requirement is that u have the minimum requirements for whatever
is ness. Assuming u have met these requirements a check is then made on the
appropriate cultural parameters to see if it can be "discovered" (ie
discovered and socially accepted). I have several ideas of how to do this.
Assuming it does fail, it is checked again next turn, starting over again
(ie making sure the min prereqs are still in place). Each percentage (or
perhaps any amount above even .01%) will aid in its chance of discovery.
However it must still pass the cultural parameter test which would have
min/max type parameters set so that even if something exceeds the min
prereqs by a whole lot it still can't be socially accepted and so no one
will "discover" it.

Finally we'll haveto figure out if items/improvements should be implimented
immediatly on discovery of the appropriate techs like in civ2 or they
themselves have certain levels above and beyond those techs (in add to the
cultural parameters).

[Richard Bruns]

In the beginning its not, but it doesn't include the "alternative" methods
most of the "western" mdeical field considers primitive which with now that
research has been done has a lot more credibility to it than once thought by
most of the western scientific community.
---
I assume you are talking about things like acupuncture. In my model the player does not even see anything like that anyway. Medicine simply raises and the people are healthier. It does not matter if the raise comes from acupuncture or a new drug or surgical technique. I believe that the player will simply not get involved in the level of detail you are talking about. The only thing that will really matter is the end results.
I never meant for the examples I gave to be a complete list of the total knowledge you have at the end of the tree. Any specific thing like this can be included in a list of things you have discovered, but I don't see how the basic tech model itself needs to be changed.

--- New Mail ---

Well do u have a better name? I would say masonry, but i really don't think
so.
---
Masonry and Cement?
---
I had a slightly diff idea, but it may be able to be incorperated somehow
with mine. Each item, tech, improv whatever has the basic tech min prereq.
However just because you meet them doesn't mean u automatically learn them.
FE the Native Americans had enough mechanical knowledge to create the wheel,
but outside of children's toys they didn't impliment it because it didn't
help them. The Chinese are even more famous for things like this. They
were actually the first to invent the car, but because no one cared or had
any use for it and also because they didn't keep records like western
scientist did, they aren't credited with it. Thus they would have met the
prereqistes in both cases, but the culture didn't have need of it for some
reason or another so in order to be "discovered" there must be a demand of
some sort.
---
So basically they didn't have the application tech at a high enough level.
---
This will have to be worked out carefully with the
social/cultural model as well as other models such as geography, military,
etc.

Anyway how could this tie in with your idea? Well instead of adding yet
another type of tech the items, improvements, basic a techs, specific techs,
social techs, etc all will be affected by the cultural parameters, instead
of just the basic techs. In order to get certain things the first and most
important requirement is that u have the minimum requirements for whatever
is ness. Assuming u have met these requirements a check is then made on the
appropriate cultural parameters to see if it can be "discovered" (ie
discovered and socially accepted). I have several ideas of how to do this.
Assuming it does fail, it is checked again next turn, starting over again
(ie making sure the min prereqs are still in place). Each percentage (or
perhaps any amount above even .01%) will aid in its chance of discovery.
However it must still pass the cultural parameter test which would have
min/max type parameters set so that even if something exceeds the min
prereqs by a whole lot it still can't be socially accepted and so no one
will "discover" it.
---
Really good in theory, but there might be a gameplay problem. What if a player really wants something but for some reason the cultural parameters don't allow the tech to be built? The player will be really frustrated. I have visions of people blasting the game because they researched to get a tech and it was unavailable for a reason they can't understand.

My idea would allow the player themselves to set the cultural standards. If they don't care about economic or civilian applications and need a way to fend off a horde of barbarians, then they can put a lot into Military Applications. This way they get what they need.

I think it wouldn't be too complex to give everything a tech prerequisite and an applications prerequisite. That way the thing comes when there is both technological ability and need, as defined by player priorities.

But the social model is not ignored. If your people believe you are researching too much or too little of some application, they will tell you. Their desires are made known and there are consequences for doing something they don't like, but you have the authority to do things anyway. This way the player interacts with the people and hears their concerns, instead of being unexpectedly denied something they want.
---
Finally we'll haveto figure out if items/improvements should be implimented
immediatly on discovery of the appropriate techs like in civ2 or they
themselves have certain levels above and beyond those techs (in add to the
cultural parameters).
---
Obviously you have to physically produce some things, so the economic model determines what something costs in monetary terms. But I think that the proper tech and application level should automatically give you the option to make or do something. I really think it would be unrealistic and bad for gameplay to have to research every little thing individually.

[Richard Bruns]

> Well do u have a better name? I would say masonry, but i really don't
think
> so.
> ---
> Masonry and Cement?

Like i said it didn't sound exactly right.

> Really good in theory, but there might be a gameplay problem. What if a
> player really wants something but for some reason the cultural parameters
> don't allow the tech to be built? The player will be really frustrated.
I
> have visions of people blasting the game because they researched to get a
> tech and it was unavailable for a reason they can't understand.
>
> My idea would allow the player themselves to set the cultural standards.
If
> they don't care about economic or civilian applications and need a way to
> fend off a horde of barbarians, then they can put a lot into Military
> Applications. This way they get what they need.

As far as some things go, the levels set will usually be quite generous.
And remember culture isn't static. If hordes of barbarians are raiding and
doing damage the culture will change to allow u to gain access to that new
tech rather quickly if u couldn't before.

> I think it wouldn't be too complex to give everything a tech prerequisite
> and an applications prerequisite. That way the thing comes when there is
> both technological ability and need, as defined by player priorities.

Not everything will. Pottery really wouldn't need one because almost every
culture in existance uses pottery. Its what u might consider a "universally
practical" invention. There are others also. However simply allowing
things to be obtained instantly because u've simply met the prereqs isn't
historically accuracte to any extent. Your right that the player should
have control, but he can create the greatest gadgets, but if no one wants
them, he wouldn't be able to use them and thus like the chinese automobile
it will be forgotten and really not matter.

> But the social model is not ignored. If your people believe you are
> researching too much or too little of some application, they will tell
you.
> Their desires are made known and there are consequences for doing
something
> they don't like, but you have the authority to do things anyway. This way
> the player interacts with the people and hears their concerns, instead of
> being unexpectedly denied something they want.

Yes, yes we all want something ^_^, but that doesn't mean we always get what
we want and the player shouldn't be any differnt. As this would be
concerned, unless if had direct military apllications that were ness for the
civs survival (which was discussed earlier on some of the tech threads for
speeding up some techs), he would have hard time finding the scientist
willing to do the work. Also what good would it do for him to create
refrigeration FE if no one wanted it? Again like in China, it would be lost
within a few years and the research would have to be redone.

Now to keep the player from thinking there's tons of bugs in his game
because he can't figure out why his discovery he was looking foward to so
much wasn't "discovered" we could put a message stating something like "Sir,
we discovered..., but do to fierce resistance/lack of support among the
general populous (or target population), further investment at this time
will only result in loss of money with no gain."

> Obviously you have to physically produce some things, so the economic
model
> determines what something costs in monetary terms. But I think that the
> proper tech and application level should automatically give you the option
> to make or do something. I really think it would be unrealistic and bad
for
> gameplay to have to research every little thing individually.

OK, but then these would have to then have to have cultural modifiers and
reguardless of the players wishes not be able to be produced if they fail
the cultural test because otherwise then the player would 99% of the time
say everything that i can produce cuz of my tech level i want to,
reguardless of what my pop thinks. There can be loopholes for mercantile
reasons, but the player must know of places wanting the suff.

I assume you are talking about things like acupuncture. In my model the
player does not even see anything like that anyway. Medicine simply raises
and the people are healthier. It does not matter if the raise comes from
acupuncture or a new drug or surgical technique. I believe that the player
will simply not get involved in the level of detail you are talking about.
The only thing that will really matter is the end results.
I never meant for the examples I gave to be a complete list of the total
knowledge you have at the end of the tree. Any specific thing like this can
be included in a list of things you have discovered, but I don't see how the
basic tech model itself needs to be changed.
---
OK i understand now, but the upper part relies on genetics and the thing is
that higher level of most eastern medicine relies more on "balancing ones
self" reguardless of genetics. Not to say that genetics doesn't have affect
on medicine, but in this model as far as the very high levels is concerned
there would be no way to adequetly represent the bridge of western and
eastern type medicines seen today since "genetics" is key to gaining really
high levels. If u can explain how that is solved in ur model the way it is,
ill be content.

Also I'be started redoing the models now that i got the input from u. I've
changed some that i haven't discussed with u for various reasons, usually
making it simpler.

[Richard Bruns]

Not everything will. Pottery really wouldn't need one because almost every
culture in existance uses pottery. Its what u might consider a "universally
practical" invention. There are others also. However simply allowing
things to be obtained instantly because u've simply met the prereqs isn't
historically accuracte to any extent.
---
A tech like Mechanical Engineering is not just a set of theories and equations. That tech is also meant to represent experementation, trials, prototypes, and the study of potential applications. So by Mechanical Engineering 50% your people have already drawn plans for a new type of machinery, built a prototype of that device, and figured out what it could be good for. Then and only then do you get the message that some new thing is available. The practical part of things is already included in all of the techs. They are not just academic disciplines; they also represent the completed and tested plans for doing things.
---
Your right that the player should
have control, but he can create the greatest gadgets, but if no one wants
them, he wouldn't be able to use them and thus like the chinese automobile
it will be forgotten and really not matter.

Yes, yes we all want something ^_^, but that doesn't mean we always get what
we want and the player shouldn't be any differnt. As this would be
concerned, unless if had direct military apllications that were ness for the
civs survival (which was discussed earlier on some of the tech threads for
speeding up some techs), he would have hard time finding the scientist
willing to do the work. Also what good would it do for him to create
refrigeration FE if no one wanted it? Again like in China, it would be lost
within a few years and the research would have to be redone.
Now to keep the player from thinking there's tons of bugs in his game
because he can't figure out why his discovery he was looking foward to so
much wasn't "discovered" we could put a message stating something like "Sir,
we discovered..., but do to fierce resistance/lack of support among the
general populous (or target population), further investment at this time
will only result in loss of money with no gain."

OK, but then these would have to then have to have cultural modifiers and
reguardless of the players wishes not be able to be produced if they fail
the cultural test because otherwise then the player would 99% of the time
say everything that i can produce cuz of my tech level i want to,
reguardless of what my pop thinks. There can be loopholes for mercantile
reasons, but the player must know of places wanting the suff.
---
This depends on the government type. In most governments throughout history, the government did whatever it felt like regardless of the wishes of the population. In a democracy your people have more power and the scenario you describe would happen. But historically democracy is rare and unusual.
Consider Peter 'the Great' and Stalin. Each one of them made it their goal to modernize Russia. They built new factories and infrastructure, changed social institutions, and introduced new technology. In short, they did whatever they felt like and anyone who didn't like it was crushed. They had to put up with social unrest, but it was a problem they could deal with. Unless a player chooses a government type like democracy, they should have the historical power to control their nation.
As for China, the techs there did not get implemented because the rulers of the country did not put effort into finding ways to implement them. China was rigidly controlled by the government, so if the government wanted to do something it would have been done. I am assuming that the player represents the government or something similar, so they would have this kind of power. In history it was not done, but that does not mean it could have been done.
I think you are overestimating the power of the people. For most of history, in almost every part of the world, all of the people were basically slaves to the government. They could riot or fight the government, but they could not instantly block something the government wanted to do. In a democracy the player will expect these kinds of situations, but if they are running monarchy or totalinarianism they will expect to have the historical power to control the country.
---
OK i understand now, but the upper part relies on genetics and the thing is
that higher level of most eastern medicine relies more on "balancing ones
self" reguardless of genetics. Not to say that genetics doesn't have affect
on medicine, but in this model as far as the very high levels is concerned
there would be no way to adequetly represent the bridge of western and
eastern type medicines seen today since "genetics" is key to gaining really
high levels. If u can explain how that is solved in ur model the way it is,
ill be content.
---
I could add Psychology as a helper tech. Would that do the job?

[Richard Bruns]

> A tech like Mechanical Engineering is not just a set of theories and
> equations. That tech is also meant to represent experementation, trials,
> prototypes, and the study of potential applications. So by Mechanical
> Engineering 50% your people have already drawn plans for a new type of
> machinery, built a prototype of that device, and figured out what it could
> be good for. Then and only then do you get the message that some new
thing
> is available. The practical part of things is already included in all of
> the techs. They are not just academic disciplines; they also represent
the
> completed and tested plans for doing things.

What I meant was that all techs have some level of use, however the
usefulness can vary from place to place for a lot of things.

> This depends on the government type. In most governments throughout
> history, the government did whatever it felt like regardless of the wishes
> of the population. In a democracy your people have more power and the
> scenario you describe would happen. But historically democracy is rare
and
> unusual.
> Consider Peter 'the Great' and Stalin. Each one of them made it
> their goal to modernize Russia. They built new factories and
> infrastructure, changed social institutions, and introduced new
technology.
> In short, they did whatever they felt like and anyone who didn't like it
was
> crushed. They had to put up with social unrest, but it was a problem they
> could deal with. Unless a player chooses a government type like
democracy,
> they should have the historical power to control their nation.
> As for China, the techs there did not get implemented because the
> rulers of the country did not put effort into finding ways to implement
> them. China was rigidly controlled by the government, so if the
government
> wanted to do something it would have been done. I am assuming that the
> player represents the government or something similar, so they would have
> this kind of power. In history it was not done, but that does not mean it
> could have been done.
> I think you are overestimating the power of the people. For most of
> history, in almost every part of the world, all of the people were
basically
> slaves to the government. They could riot or fight the government, but
they
> could not instantly block something the government wanted to do. In a
> democracy the player will expect these kinds of situations, but if they
are
> running monarchy or totalinarianism they will expect to have the
historical
> power to control the country.

Well once again I said there would be large enough to do what u wanted.
However if the people in Russia really didn't want Russia modernized a
little more so than what they were it prob couldn't have been done and in
any event that still doesn't mean they should get it as soon as the gain the
very minimum prereqs, because once again this is really historically
inaccuracte.
Also if did not impliment it that way and the player always got it when they
had the base minimums then if the next turn it went below those minimums
there should be a signifigant chance they loose that tech because they no
longer would have the ness prereqs. However, the other way i want to
impliment it, where it goes up as u get higher on all prereqs and such there
is a greater chance of learning it. Thus even if they did manage to drop
below we wouldn't have quite a much reason to have the players suddenly
"loose" the techs, but have the chance go up a little slower. This would
help incorperate game balance then.

> OK i understand now, but the upper part relies on genetics and the thing
is
> that higher level of most eastern medicine relies more on "balancing ones
> self" reguardless of genetics. Not to say that genetics doesn't have
affect
> on medicine, but in this model as far as the very high levels is concerned
> there would be no way to adequetly represent the bridge of western and
> eastern type medicines seen today since "genetics" is key to gaining
really
> high levels. If u can explain how that is solved in ur model the way it
is,
> ill be content.
> ---
> I could add Psychology as a helper tech. Would that do the job?

Ok that would prob work.

[Richard Bruns]

What I meant was that all techs have some level of use, however the
usefulness can vary from place to place for a lot of things.
---
My idea was to have that level of usefulness be represented by a value; the level of your Application techs. These techs determine your ability to use what you found by being a prerequisite for things. Your ability to research application techs would be influenced by the wishes of your people, so if they didn't want war it would be harder to research Military Applications.
---
Well once again I said there would be large enough to do what u wanted.
--
I have no idea what this means.
---
However if the people in Russia really didn't want Russia modernized a
little more so than what they were it prob couldn't have been done
---
What exactly could they have done to stop it? It wasn't at all voluntary in history. Both of these rulers faced intense internal discontent and they were able to squash it. In my model, when you have a totalitarian government you always have the option of doing something but you are told if people will hate it. If you do it anyway you will face civil disorder and will have do deal with all of the problems that will cause. The social model is still important, but historically governments have been able to use martial law to do whatever they wanted to.
---
and in
any event that still doesn't mean they should get it as soon as the gain the
very minimum prereqs, because once again this is really historically
inaccuracte.
---
If my engineers have designed a steam engine, built and tested a prototype, and told me how to use it, then how is it inaccurate for me to start building them? The research and design process is included in all of the techs.
---
Also if did not impliment it that way and the player always got it when they
had the base minimums then if the next turn it went below those minimums
there should be a signifigant chance they loose that tech because they no
longer would have the ness prereqs.
---
If their tech falls to below the prerequisites of something, then they get a message like, "We no longer know how to make/use XYZ. If we researched more into ABC, then we would able to make/use this item again." At that point, all things that you owned that needed that tech would become idle and start to decay. Once you rediscovered the necessary techs, you would gain access to the things again if they had not decayed too much.
---
However, the other way i want to
impliment it, where it goes up as u get higher on all prereqs and such there
is a greater chance of learning it.
---
I don't understand this. What is 'it'?
---
Thus even if they did manage to drop
below we wouldn't have quite a much reason to have the players suddenly
"loose" the techs, but have the chance go up a little slower. This would
help incorperate game balance then.
---
So if I lost all knowledge of flight, then the only result would be that the quality of my new jet fighters would only increase at a slower rate? That makes no sense. I must be reading this wrong.

[Richard Bruns]

> If my engineers have designed a steam engine, built and tested a
prototype,
> and told me how to use it, then how is it inaccurate for me to start
> building them? The research and design process is included in all of the
> techs.
> ---
The thing is though they might not have done that. The basic tech chart
doesn't represent them working toward specific inventions, but rather to
general improvements. It is through these improvements that new
technologies are discovered. In order to represent what was stated in your
last paragraph we'd have to use another type of model because they aren't
just working on the "steam engine" or whatever, they are working on
everything possible to improve there understanding of technology.

> Also if did not impliment it that way and the player always got it when
they
> had the base minimums then if the next turn it went below those minimums
> there should be a signifigant chance they loose that tech because they no
> longer would have the ness prereqs.
> ---
> If their tech falls to below the prerequisites of something, then they get
a
> message like, "We no longer know how to make/use XYZ. If we researched
more
> into ABC, then we would able to make/use this item again." At that point,
> all things that you owned that needed that tech would become idle and
start
> to decay. Once you rediscovered the necessary techs, you would gain
access
> to the things again if they had not decayed too much.
> ---

That's what I mean which is also historically inaccuracte and the way i
propose would solve this while keeping game balance. It may take a lot of
skill and knowledge to create gunpowder, but once the hard work is done the
formula can be written down for anyone to look at and all they would need to
do is follow the formula. Now over time it is usually lost, distorted, etc.
so the ability to use this method forever wouldn't work, but would allow for
several % points to drop before it couldn't be done, again this would have a
chance off losing it each turn slowly getting higher till it was guaranteed
to be lost.

> However, the other way i want to
> impliment it, where it goes up as u get higher on all prereqs and such
there
> is a greater chance of learning it.
> ---
> I don't understand this. What is 'it'?
> ---
> Thus even if they did manage to drop
> below we wouldn't have quite a much reason to have the players suddenly
> "loose" the techs, but have the chance go up a little slower. This would
> help incorperate game balance then.
> ---
> So if I lost all knowledge of flight, then the only result would be that
the
> quality of my new jet fighters would only increase at a slower rate?
That
> makes no sense. I must be reading this wrong.

Not all. If u lost all knowledge on flight you could no longer fly. But if
you lost a little bit u could still fly your jets and keep them repaired
(somewhat), but not build new ones. Eventually if u don't continue to put
research back in, the repairs will do less and less, however use same amount
of resources till repairing does nothing at all. The quality of your pilots
shouldn't change too much so long as u can fly other planes however.

[Richard Bruns]

The thing is though they might not have done that. The basic tech chart
doesn't represent them working toward specific inventions, but rather to
general improvements. It is through these improvements that new
technologies are discovered. In order to represent what was stated in your
last paragraph we'd have to use another type of model because they aren't
just working on the "steam engine" or whatever, they are working on
everything possible to improve there understanding of technology.
---
I designed the entire system around the assumption that the basic tech chart does represent your people working toward specific inventions as well as the general application. They are working on all possible ways to improve the technology, which includes many potential applications.
Remember that your research is not being done in only one lab. It is the combined effort of hundreds or thousands of people in your civ. Each one of them is working on something specific within the scope of that technology, and their combined efforts raise the general tech level and also create specific applications. So the tech level prerequisite already includes a working prototype.
---
That's what I mean which is also historically inaccuracte and the way i
propose would solve this while keeping game balance. It may take a lot of
skill and knowledge to create gunpowder, but once the hard work is done the
formula can be written down for anyone to look at and all they would need to
do is follow the formula. Now over time it is usually lost, distorted, etc.
so the ability to use this method forever wouldn't work, but would allow for
several % points to drop before it couldn't be done, again this would have a
chance off losing it each turn slowly getting higher till it was guaranteed
to be lost.

Not all. If u lost all knowledge on flight you could no longer fly. But if
you lost a little bit u could still fly your jets and keep them repaired
(somewhat), but not build new ones. Eventually if u don't continue to put
research back in, the repairs will do less and less, however use same amount
of resources till repairing does nothing at all. The quality of your pilots
shouldn't change too much so long as u can fly other planes however.
---
It seems that you want to attach a percentage to each individual application. When you discover the thing it is at 100% so you can use it normally. If you let the tech levels slide, the percentage of the application falls steadily so your ability to use the thing declines until it hits zero at which time you cannot use it at all. If the tech levels then rise again, the percentage goes back to 100. This would be reasonable and workable, as long as the player cannot directly influence these percentages. If the player has to micromanage hundreds of application percentages like these, the game will get so tedious it will be unplayable.

[Richard Bruns]

> The thing is though they might not have done that. The basic tech chart
> doesn't represent them working toward specific inventions, but rather to
> general improvements. It is through these improvements that new
> technologies are discovered. In order to represent what was stated in
your
> last paragraph we'd have to use another type of model because they aren't
> just working on the "steam engine" or whatever, they are working on
> everything possible to improve there understanding of technology.
> ---
> I designed the entire system around the assumption that the basic tech
chart
> does represent your people working toward specific inventions as well as
the
> general application. They are working on all possible ways to improve the
> technology, which includes many potential applications.
> Remember that your research is not being done in only one lab. It is the
> combined effort of hundreds or thousands of people in your civ. Each one
of
> them is working on something specific within the scope of that
technology,
> and their combined efforts raise the general tech level and also create
> specific applications. So the tech level prerequisite already includes a
> working prototype.

The thing is most people throughout history had no idea to what they were
working toward exactly so this IMO is completely wrong, however, if u feel
that stongly about it then I can ask the question to everyone in the forum
and see what they think. And ur point about the many labs goes ahead and
also simply increases the resoning for my argument because each lab, though
coordinated with others perhaps, will be attempting to learn things
individually. The player may know when approx they'll reach each tech, but
in order to simulate history more accuratly we need to have this or
something equally as good.

> That's what I mean which is also historically inaccuracte and the way i
> propose would solve this while keeping game balance. It may take a lot of
> skill and knowledge to create gunpowder, but once the hard work is done
the
> formula can be written down for anyone to look at and all they would need
to
> do is follow the formula. Now over time it is usually lost, distorted,
etc.
> so the ability to use this method forever wouldn't work, but would allow
for
> several % points to drop before it couldn't be done, again this would have
a
> chance off losing it each turn slowly getting higher till it was
guaranteed
> to be lost.
>
> Not all. If u lost all knowledge on flight you could no longer fly. But
if
> you lost a little bit u could still fly your jets and keep them repaired
> (somewhat), but not build new ones. Eventually if u don't continue to put
> research back in, the repairs will do less and less, however use same
amount
> of resources till repairing does nothing at all. The quality of your
pilots
> shouldn't change too much so long as u can fly other planes however.
> ---
> It seems that you want to attach a percentage to each individual
> application. When you discover the thing it is at 100% so you can use it
> normally. If you let the tech levels slide, the percentage of the
> application falls steadily so your ability to use the thing declines until
> it hits zero at which time you cannot use it at all. If the tech levels
> then rise again, the percentage goes back to 100. This would be
reasonable
> and workable, as long as the player cannot directly influence these
> percentages. If the player has to micromanage hundreds of application
> percentages like these, the game will get so tedious it will be
unplayable.

Something like that. First off it would only begin to slide once it went
below the min prereq. The thing that would be differnt would be if it ever
reached zero, it would have to be relearned because the knowledge is
considered "lost" similar to what i said about the Chinese and the
automobile.

[Richard Bruns]

The thing is most people throughout history had no idea to what they were
working toward exactly so this IMO is completely wrong, however, if u feel
that stongly about it then I can ask the question to everyone in the forum
and see what they think.
---
They don't have to know what they are working toward. Each percentage point of a tech represents investigation into many random things, anything from trying new crop plants to tinkering with machinery to figuring out the equations that govern pendulum movement. It is the accumulation of these random investigations that increase your civ's technical knowledge. And after a while, these investigations lead to something useful. Isaac Newton said that he could see things better because he was standing on the shoulders of giants. None of these early thinkers, or 'giants', knew what Newton planned on doing and indeed they might not have seen any practical use for their work. But their investigations increased the tech level, leading to useful things.
---
And ur point about the many labs goes ahead and
also simply increases the resoning for my argument because each lab, though
coordinated with others perhaps, will be attempting to learn things
individually. The player may know when approx they'll reach each tech, but
in order to simulate history more accuratly we need to have this or
something equally as good.
---
I hope that the player will not have to micromanage every lab. I thought there would be one control box where you allocate some percentage of your total RP pool to every tech. With this in mind, I tried to use the minimum number to techs. If they have to choose between more than two dozen techs at the same time, it will get very confusing. In my mind the RP pool represents the total creative capacity of your civ, everything from inventors in garages to professors at a public university to business people trtying new things in a factory or workshop. It is impossible to manage all of this directly, so you have to treat it as a lump sum.
I designed my model around this assumption and the assumption that the basic techs included practical experimentation and prototypes. If my understanding of the game mechanics was flawed or you deny those assumptions, then all of my efforts on the tech model were wasted.
---
Something like that. First off it would only begin to slide once it went
below the min prereq. The thing that would be differnt would be if it ever
reached zero, it would have to be relearned because the knowledge is
considered "lost" similar to what i said about the Chinese and the
automobile.
---
Sounds good.

[Richard Bruns]

> They don't have to know what they are working toward. Each
> percentage point of a tech represents investigation into many random
things,
> anything from trying new crop plants to tinkering with machinery to
figuring
> out the equations that govern pendulum movement. It is the accumulation
of
> these random investigations that increase your civ's technical knowledge.
> And after a while, these investigations lead to something useful. Isaac
> Newton said that he could see things better because he was standing on the
> shoulders of giants. None of these early thinkers, or 'giants', knew what
> Newton planned on doing and indeed they might not have seen any practical
> use for their work. But their investigations increased the tech level,
> leading to useful things.

> I hope that the player will not have to micromanage every lab. I
> thought there would be one control box where you allocate some percentage
of
> your total RP pool to every tech. With this in mind, I tried to use the
> minimum number to techs. If they have to choose between more than two
dozen
> techs at the same time, it will get very confusing. In my mind the RP
pool
> represents the total creative capacity of your civ, everything from
> inventors in garages to professors at a public university to business
people
> trtying new things in a factory or workshop. It is impossible to manage
all
> of this directly, so you have to treat it as a lump sum.
> I designed my model around this assumption and the assumption that
> the basic techs included practical experimentation and prototypes. If my
> understanding of the game mechanics was flawed or you deny those
> assumptions, then all of my efforts on the tech model were wasted.
> ---
Here's where I differ. Its not in the theory that what the percentages
represent is practical experience or prototypes, but that that just because
u have certain level's of experience doesn't mean u will automatically have
all the understanding ness. to create an item. It means that u have a
chance. This increases the higher up u are. This represents more of
someone who redifines the way in which that aspect of technology (or the
social structure for social advances) is viewed. The way it is modeled now
without that in it there is no way to represent this aspect of the way
science advances, ie most scientist gradually expand the knowledge of what
they know which is already modeled using the percentages, however the
abiliuty that some great minds transcend and redefine the way in which
science is looked at can't be modeled like it is unless we use my idea. It
would show that even though u might have the knowledge u need a "great mind"
to help make sence of it enough for practical purposes, ie specific advances
like gunpowder.

> Something like that. First off it would only begin to slide once it went
> below the min prereq. The thing that would be differnt would be if it
ever
> reached zero, it would have to be relearned because the knowledge is
> considered "lost" similar to what i said about the Chinese and the
> automobile.
> ---
> Sounds good.

But i we use this idea we need to use the other idea of not ness gaining it
right away, ie having min prereq, but instead having certain % chance to
learn it which will rise as ur level rises till its 99%. Also some things
would still have to have cultural modifiers, such as the social advance
"Discovery of Chi"...i'm trying to find some equivalents for europe and
other places, but i doubt i will find one for europe/modern western world
since religion of the west stressed that man should control nature while the
east and native american religions stressed man should live in harmony with
nature.

[Richard Bruns]

It seems like you want the following:

Crossbow 10% chance: Mechanical Engineering 16%
Crossbow 20% chance: Mechanical Engineering 17%
Crossbow 30% chance: Mechanical Engineering 18%
Crossbow 40% chance: Mechanical Engineering 19%
Crossbow 50% chance: Mechanical Engineering 20%
Crossbow 60% chance: Mechanical Engineering 21%
Crossbow 70% chance: Mechanical Engineering 22%
Crossbow 80% chance: Mechanical Engineering 23%
Crossbow 90% chance: Mechanical Engineering 24%
Crossbow 100% chance: Mechanical Engineering 25%

Whereas I prefer:
Crossbow 100% chance:
Mechanical Engineering 25%, Military Applications 30%

And as for culture, I think there should be no distinction between eastern and western on the tech tree. Instead of having to be in an eastern culture to discover Chi, you simply have to be at a certain level of philosophy and environmentalism.

[Richard Bruns]

> It seems like you want the following:
>
> Crossbow 10% chance: Mechanical Engineering 16%
> Crossbow 20% chance: Mechanical Engineering 17%
> Crossbow 30% chance: Mechanical Engineering 18%
> Crossbow 40% chance: Mechanical Engineering 19%
> Crossbow 50% chance: Mechanical Engineering 20%
> Crossbow 60% chance: Mechanical Engineering 21%
> Crossbow 70% chance: Mechanical Engineering 22%
> Crossbow 80% chance: Mechanical Engineering 23%
> Crossbow 90% chance: Mechanical Engineering 24%
> Crossbow 100% chance: Mechanical Engineering 25%
>
> Whereas I prefer:
> Crossbow 100% chance:
> Mechanical Engineering 25%, Military Applications 30%

That's pretty much it, though the increase rate might differ.

> And as for culture, I think there should be no distinction between eastern
> and western on the tech tree. Instead of having to be in an eastern
culture
> to discover Chi, you simply have to be at a certain level of philosophy
and
> environmentalism.

I know what ur saying, but it has a lot to do with the religious type, not
just religious level also. I mean the us is definatly high enough on
enviormentalism and philosophy it would be except its philosophy has taken
another direction. If we go with ur idea we do another type of
discimination saying that 1 philosophy isn't as good as another (although i
agree with u that it should prob be higher than others, many might
disagree).

[Richard Bruns]

That's pretty much it, though the increase rate might differ.
---
I would prefer to leave out the randomness and have the player only get the tech when it reaches the 100% mark. But there may be a compromise. Remember my first idea, the one about inventors that was eventually shot down for good reasons? Within a certain range, the chance of discovery would be dependant on the conditions I outlined in that proposal. So for a time, there is a chance that inventors will give you the thing. As the basic tech increases, there is a bigger chance that you get the thing, until you hit the 100% point at which time you will always get the thing. But the chance is not totally random. It is greatly influenced by social conditions. So if you have educated people and a good economy, you will have a much greater chance of getting things earlier. That reduces a lot of the randomness and I think it would work. Does it sound good?
---
I know what ur saying, but it has a lot to do with the religious type, not
just religious level also. I mean the us is definatly high enough on
enviormentalism and philosophy it would be except its philosophy has taken
another direction. If we go with ur idea we do another type of
discimination saying that 1 philosophy isn't as good as another (although i
agree with u that it should prob be higher than others, many might
disagree).
---
The US is developing a lot of the 'eastern' type thought. For example, in the home and garden section of the bookstore, you will find dozens of Feng Shui books. And as for the problem of one philosophy being higher than another, you are right. I would suggest that the player not direct philosophical stuff at all. I would like to see it be developed by your people without your influence. It would follow the conditions I outlined in my first tech proposal about inventors. I think philosophy should develop without player interference, so you get the feeling that your people are real and unique. But everyone else seems to want to order the people to think a certain way and tell them what philosophy to invent.