Demo 5 Tech Tree

[Richard Bruns]

Previous Technology Discussion

Justification for Changes

In most tech trees, all techs are discrete units that are linked together by prerequisites. For a game with the depth and complexity of Clash, this would lead to many problems. The main one is complexity. A tech tree with hundreds of techs linked together would be difficult for the player to learn and very difficult to construct. It would also be vulnerable to bugs and gameplay problems. A similar problem is one of flexibility. Such a tree is very hard to adjust. It would make tech tree creation or modification very difficult for the Clash team and anyone who wanted to make a scenario.

Another problem is historical accuracy. In the normal tech tree, all knowledge comes in big chunks and never improves after you get it. Your metallurgy skill is the same in 2000 BC and 2000 AD. This is unrealistic. Historically, technologies are constantly improving in a continuous fashion.

To reflect this and avoid the problems with a standard tech tree, I have created a tree that splits technologies into basic technologies and application technologies. Basic techs were already being used before I started working on this tree, and I saw that the idea could be expanded to almost all types of knowledge. The current form of the tech system is mostly my design, but many of the basic ideas came from other people. LGJ’s editing has improved the tree a lot, and I expect that the suggestions of other people will also be very helpful.

My main innovation was the structure of applications. Originally, Basic technologies served as RP multipliers for items on a standard tech chart. I saw that there would be many advantages to making applications have a prerequisite of a certain percentage of basic tech rather than another application. This solves the problems of complexity and flexibility that plague most tech trees. Rather than making a complex chain of applications, a thing is simply assigned a prerequisite of some percentage of one or more basic technologies. This makes it amazingly easy to modify the tech tree and add units. Now, we can allow other model leaders to give us a list of technologies that they want and easily put those technologies in the tree. With the normal tech tree type, we would have to force other people to use the technologies that we put in at the beginning. The current tech tree model is flexible enough to be easily changed by the Clash team and any scenario designer.

Description of the System

Basic techs are broad, contiguous techs that are defined as percentages from zero to a hundred. Zero percent represents no knowledge, 1% represents minimal knowledge, and 100% represents the highest level of publicly known application as of January 1, 2000. The scale is logarithmic, with each 10% increase representing approximately a doubling in knowledge or skill. This might not be entirely accurate, but it works for now and we can rescale it later.

Note that a basic tech like Mechanical Engineering is not just a set of theories and equations. The techs are also meant to represent experimentation, 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. At that point 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.

Basic technology levels are increased by spending Research Points, or RP’s. These are generated by your civ, and the amount your civilization generates should grow constantly. Because the rate of knowledge growth is exponential and the rate of RP production is also close to exponential, the number of RP’s spent for an increase in percentage must also grow exponentially. Also, you must spend RP’s to keep your tech levels from falling. This represents the effort put into teaching the people your civ’s scientific, cultural, and technical knowledge. The amount of effort you put into education is proportional to the amount you know, so you have to spend RP’s based on the level of the tech.

So we have a differential equation of the form
dP=(RP-a(bP^n))(c/(eP)^m)
where a, b, c, e, n, and m are constants, P is the current percentage, dP is the change in that percentage every turn, and RP is the amount of RP's spent on the tech in one turn.
If RP is zero, the tech declines at a rate proportional to the level of the tech. If RP=xP, there is no growth. You can see that the input required to keep the tech level constant increases as the tech does, to simulate the greater amount of teaching required. In between these two, the decline is less rapid but still present. If the first term is greater than zero, then the tech rises, but the rate of the rise slows as the tech level increases.

Specific applications have percent prerequisites in one or more basic techs, as well as other possible requirements. For example, a Fission Power Plant would need something around Atomic Applications 80%, Architecture 65%, Chemistry 75%, Civil Engineering 60%, Mechanical Engineering 60%, and Access to Uranium. The exact percentages will have to be determined by playtesting.

The method of acquiring these basic techs is a matter that has been disputed. It has been said that these should be researched separately as individual technologies. I contend that this is entirely unnecessary and would lead to excessive micromanagement. There will be hundreds of basic techs, and requiring them to be researched separately would require an enormous amount of micromanagement. The research of the application is already included in the basic tech; it is not like you are jumping directly from theory to application.
LJG believes that there should be some randomness in the acquisition of these techs. I wanted them to be given automatically whenever the prerequisites are reached. I have come up with a possible compromise. Rather than simply having a computer generated random number decide if you get the tech, there is an "inventor window" starting about 5% before the tech prerequisites. During that window, the computer checks social conditions to see if you have a society that encourages invention. If you do, there is a large chance that the thing gets invented ahead of time. But if you have a repressive society, the thing will probably not get invented until you hit the prerequisite. This adds some randomness while still ensuring that the player will always get the thing at the prerequisite. It is also a way of rewarding the player for having a good society. For more information about how the “inventor window” system might work, look at my now-defunct thread, “Proposed Technology Modification,” from November 13, 1999. The information and a discussion about it is also in the middle of page 2 of the “Tech Research Chart 2” thread. I don’t know if the extra coding is worth it, but if everyone wants randomness in tech assignments this would do a good job of supplying it.

Basic technologies also have prerequisites. Prerequisites that have a percentage beside them are required prerequisites. You need the listed percentage of these technologies before you can get any farther in the tech. For example, you need 70% in your Biology tech before you can advance beyond 70% in agriculture. This is because 70% Biology represents Genetic Engineering, and agriculture beyond 70% needs genetically engineered crop plants.

Other technologies listed are simply helper techs that increase the rate at which you learn the tech. The rate increase is based on the percentage of the other technology; if you have a high percentage of a helper tech, you learn the technology faster. All prerequisites are also helper techs, so if you had 90% Biology your Agriculture tech would advance more quickly than if you only had 75% Biology. Applications can also have helper techs that are not required prerequisites. Also, it is possible for applications to have other applications as helper techs. For example, your Fission power plants are better if you also have other types of power plants.

Specifics

Some examples of applications are:

Abolishment of Slavery: Philosophy 50%, Religion 40%
Bow: Woodworking 5%
Capitalism: Economics 40%
Centralized Government: Government 15%
Composite Bow: Chemistry 15%
Conscription: Government 1%, Tactics 1%
Crossbow: Mechanical Engineering 25%
Despotism: Government 5%
Democracy: Government 60%, Philosophy 40%
Environmentalism: Ecology 50%
Feudalism: Government 30%
Fundamentalism: Government 30%, Religion 30%
Hand Grenades: Chemistry 40%
Human Rights: Philosophy 40%, Religion 30%
Leather Armor: Textiles 10%
Longsword: Metallurgy 35%
Mail Armor: Metallurgy 25%
Musket: Chemistry 30%, Metallurgy 30%
Plate Armor: Metallurgy 40%, Mechanical Engineering
Public Education: 30% in all core sciences, Government 50%
Representative Government: Government 50%, Philosophy 30%
Rifle: Chemistry 40%, Metallurgy 40%, Physics(Mechanics) 30%
Rights for Labor Class: Philosophy 30%, Religion 20%
Spear: Woodworking 2%, Metallurgy
Standing Army: Government 1%, Tactics 1%
Sword: Metallurgy 20%

Note that gaining the prerequisites for the application does not necessarily mean that you can use it instantly. Any item must be made using the productive capacity of your civ, and social applications like Public Education can only be implemented if your population agrees to it, based on the social model.

Tech Loss and Application Percentages

When you discover an application it is at 100% and 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%. As you research the prerequisites and helper techs that allowed you to get the thing in the first place, the application percentage grows, representing your increased knowledge about the thing. The application percentage for items or improvements can also grow as you manufacture that thing. This represents the greater knowledge of the thing that comes from practical experience.

Consider the application called Crossbow that needs Mechanical Engineering 30%. When Crossbows are invented, they are at 100%. If your Mechanical Engineering level then drops below 30%, the Crossbow level falls. At this point, you can still use any existing crossbows but cannot make any new ones. However, you have lost most of the knowledge of how to repair and maintain them, so the effectiveness of your crossbows decreases. The crossbow level drops steadily as long as the Mechanical Engineering tech is below 30%. If the crossbow level drops to 0%, all crossbows are now completely unworkable. All existing crossbows vanish and the knowledge is lost entirely. You must rediscover the knowledge to make any new crossbows.
But if you invest more into your tech and the Mechanical Engineering tech goes back up to 30%, the crossbow tech goes back to 100%. All existing crossbows are repaired and you can make new ones. If the Mechanical Engineering tech increases further, the application percentage also increases and is now above 100%. Your crossbows are more and more effective, and your army that is using them is more powerful. Note that the application tech level is linear, not logarithmic like the basic techs. There is an upper limit to the application techs; you cannot make crossbowmen that are more powerful than riflemen.

This should 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. The percentages are only influenced by the basic tech levels and the amount the thing is produced. They remain mostly invisible to the player.

Cultural Uniqueness

Another innovation in the tech model is the idea of a “Template Tech.” This is actually an application that changes its name, description, and icon based on the civ’s culture. “Culture” in this context more closely means, “Artistic and Religious preference.” It is chosen at the beginning of the game by the player and does not change. It has nothing to do with culture as defined by the social model. For example, the template tech “House of Worship” would be a cathedral for European cultures, a mosque for Arab cultures, a pagoda for Oriental cultures, and a temple for Native American cultures. The house of worship does exactly the same thing for all people and has exactly the same prerequisites, but it looks different so we don’t have a situation like the one in Civ 2 where the Japanese or Zulu have to build a cathedral to keep people happy.
The player never sees the generic name. It is simply a coding description. They would simply see a message like, “We can now build cathedrals” or “We can now build mosques.”

In the basic game, we should keep all things that come from template techs identical. That way, no race of people will have any kind of advantage. But we should give scenario designers the option of changing the things that come from template techs. For example, someone who made a 20th century scenario might want a template tech called, “World War 2 fighter.” If you played Americans this would give you a P-51, if you played Japanese this would give you a Zero, etc. As any military history buff knows, these planes were not identical. The scenario designer might want to give them slightly different statistics to reflect history. The ability to make these template techs lead to different things based on the civ would be a powerful design tool.

Basic Technologies: The Tech Tree

Agriculture
Determines the efficiency of your civ’s food production.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Chemistry, Ecology, Geology, Mathematics
0%-69% Biology
70-X% Biology (70%)

Air Transportation
Allows you to construct airplanes and blimps.
Prerequisites: 0%-119% Physics-Mechanics (50%), Mechanical Engineering (50%)
120%-X% Electromagnetics (115%)

Architecture
Determines the quality and maximum size of your civ’s buildings
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Mathematics(5%), Civil Engineering

Art
Aids the progress of all social techs.
Prerequisites: None

Astronomy
Your civ’s knowledge of the heavens.
Prerequisites: 0%-9% Mathematics
10%-X% Mathematics (5%)
30%-X% Optics (20%)
70%-X% Computers (60%)

Atomic Applications
This tech determines your civ’s ability to harness atomic forces. I think that we could do without this one and only use Electromagnetics.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Electromagnetics (70%)

Biology
Your civ’s knowledge of the structure of organisms.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Mathematics, Chemistry
40%-X% Optics (30%)
70%-X% Computers (60%)

Ceramics
This is your civ’s ability to make ceramic items, mostly pottery. We might not need this one.
Prerequisites: None

Chemistry
Knowledge of the use and manipulation of chemical processes.
Prerequisites: 0%-29% Mathematics
30%-X% Mathematics (10%)

Civil Engineering
Your civ’s knowledge of the building and use of roads, sewers, power grids, water supply, etc.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Mathematics (5%), Architecture

Communications
This represents the systems used to convey information. A higher level has the effect of making your civ more culturally homogenous.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Government, Land Transportation, Water Transportation
40%-79% Electronics (30%)
80%-X% Computers (85%)

Computers
Hardware and software used to compute information. I originally wanted to have this include things like abacus and slide rule and not need electronics until 20%, but LGJ changed it to leave those out.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Electronics (40%)
125%-X% Optics (110%)

Cybernetics
I don’t think this one is necessary. There will be few cyborg applications, and they can all be assigned prerequisites directly from other basic technologies.
Prerequisite: 0%-X% Biology (85%), Robotics (90%)

Diplomacy
Your ability to manipulate your people and deal with other governments.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Communication, Government

Domestication
Increases farm production and the quality of your mounted units.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Biology

Ecology
Your civ’s knowledge about environmental systems and animal behavior.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Biology (20%), Geology (25%), Mathematics

Economics
Your civ’s knowledge of financial and economic systems. Allows you to tax more effectively. I would suggest adding Psychology as a helper tech.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Mathematics (20%)

Electromagnetics
The branch of Physics that studies small particles and magnetic fields.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Mathematics (60%), Physics-Mechanics (60%)

Electronics
Your civ’s ability to use electricity and electrical devices.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Electromagnetics (60%), Metallurgy (60%)

Gaming
Represents the level and types of games/sports the civ has. Has the effect of making your population healthier and more intelligent.
Prerequisites: None

Geology
Your knowledge of the physical nature of the planet.
Prerequisites: 0%-24% Mathematics (1%)
25%-X% Physics-Mechanics (10%)

Government
Your civ’s knowledge of the art of managing the country. High levels of this tech result in more efficient administration and happier people.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Communication, Psychology

Industrial Engineering
Any activity that increases the efficiency of the manufacturing and distribution processes. Makes production more efficient, especially when mass quantities are ordered. Gives more people access to goods that are produced.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Economics
30%-X% Mechanical Engineering (45%), Economics

Land Transportation
Makes movement of goods and units more efficient.
Prerequisites: 20-119% Mechanical Engineering (10%)
120%-X% Electromagnetics (115%)

Literature
Aids the progress of all social techs. Makes your people more literate, as they have more incentive to read.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Communication (15%)

Mapping and Navigation
LGJ thinks we don’t need this one. It increases the effectiveness of your military tactics and makes it less likely for units to become lost.
Prerequisites: 0%-X%, Mathematics, Electromagnetics, Computers

Masonry and Cement
This tech covers your ability to use brick, stone, and cement. It allows you to pave roads better and make stone or brick buildings better.
Prerequisites: 20%-X% Chemistry (35%), Ceramics (25%)

Mathematics
Aids the progress of all non-social technologies (Acts as an important helper tech for everything)
Prerequisites: None

Mechanical Engineering
Your civ’s ability to make machines and engines. LGJ thinks that this can be combined with Physics-Mechanics to form one tech. I disagree, and contend that this is an entirely different field of study.
Prerequisites: 0%-30% Woodworking (10%)
30%-80%Metallurgy(20%)
80%-X% Synthetics(10%)

Medicine
Your ability to provide medical care to the populace. A higher level automatically makes people healthier and increases life expectancy and population growth.
Prerequisites: 10-X% Biology (10%), Psychology

Metallurgy
Your ability to refine and use metals of all types.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Chemistry, Mathematics

Meteorology
Your knowledge of weather. Allows you to predict some natural disasters.
Prerequisites: 0%-24% Mathematics (30%), Geology
25%-69% Electronics (40%), Geology
70%-X% Computers (70%), Space Transportation (50%), Geology

Music
Aids the progress of social techs. It might be unnecessary, as we already have an Art tech.
Prerequisites: None

Optics
Your ability to make glass and use it.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Chemistry (35%), Mathematics

Philosophy
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Religion, Psychology

Physics-Mechanics
Your civ’s knowledge of gravity, motion, forces, and energy.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Mathematics (20%)

Psychology
Your knowledge of the human mind.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Ecology

Religion
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Philosophy

Resource Gathering
Your ability to hunt, fish, mine, and find any natural resource. Increases the effectiveness of any of these activities.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Mathematics, Ecology, Geology

Robotics
I don’t think we need this one. Any Robot application can be directly traced back to the prerequisites listed here.
Prerequisite: 0-74% Electronics (30%), Mechanics (60%)
75-X% Computers (70%), Mechanics (60%)

Space Transportation
Your ability to send people and satellites into space.
Prerequisites: 0%-39% Electronics (50%), Air Transportation
40%-X% Computers (35%)
120%-X% Electromagnetics (115%)

Synthetics
Your civ’s ability to make artificial materials. This could possibly be combined with Ceramics.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Chemistry (65%)

Textiles
Your ability to make and use fabric and leather.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Mathematics

Theater
Makes people happier. We might be able to expand this to include television and movies.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Literature (10%)

Water Transportation
Affects your ability to make boats and move goods by water.
Prerequisites: 0%-49% Woodworking (1%)
50%-120% Metallurgy (40%)
120%-X% Electromagnetics (115%)

Woodworking
Your ability to use wood and make paper.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Mathematics

Military Techs

There is some debate about how many of these should be included and how they should operate. This information is tentative.

Logistics
Increases your ability to supply troops and keep them in the field. Makes military operations more efficient and reduces attrition.
0%-X% Industrial Engineering

Combat Engineering
Determines your ability to make field fortifications and besiege enemies
0%-X% Mechanical Engineering

Tactics
All tactics techs would have the same helper techs:
0%-X% Gaming, Mapping and Navigation

The tactics techs are:
Infantry Tactics (All foot soldier operations)
Mobile Tactics (Cavalry, Armor)
Air Tactics (Blimps, Planes, Helicopters)
Sea Tactics (All ships and boats)
Space Tactics (Satellites)
Combined Arms (Determines the ability of different branches of the military to work together)

These tactics techs might give a small bonus to armies of that type to represent the abilities of your unit commanders.

Additionally, the tactics you order could be applications with these tactics techs as prerequisites, such as:
Entrenchment: Infantry Tactics 30%
Encirclement: Infantry Tactics 20%, Mobile Tactics 30%, Combined Arms 15%

It is also possible that army types would have tactics techs as prerequisites:
Legion: Infantry Tactics 35%, Metallurgy 30%

I think that is everything. Let me know what you think.

[This message has been edited by Richard Bruns (edited January 29, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Richard Bruns (edited February 27, 2000).]

[Lord God Jinnai]

This is a reply to an e-mail Rich sent me.
----------
> It represents the theoretical and applicatation of the mechanical side of
> physics. I really don't see the need to seperate the two since adding
> appropriate prereqs will solve the problem of machines.
> ---
> The ability to build engines and turbines is very different than the study
> of physics equations. Think of the difference between shop class and
> physics class. I definitely suggest adding a 'Machinery' basic tech. I
> will tentatively add it to the forum post, and we can discuss this on the
> forum while getting other people's input.
> ---
OK

> I don't think it needs to be because today they are still refered to as
> masons and the term masonry is still used.
> ---
> I dodn't know that paving highways was known as masonry. Remember that I
> meant the tech to be used for building AND paving roads.
> ---
Well u also would have to add blacktop and the rubber blacktop.

> Those would be application techs and could easily fit into what we have w/o
> making another basic tech.
> ---
> Can you think of good prerequisites for mapmaking or navigation? I can't.
> It is a different discipline than anything else, and it affects everything
> from ship navigation to troop movement and tactics to the ability to use
> land well. I will post it as an idea and let people know about your
> reservations. Then we can use their input to decide what to do.
> To be fair, I will also post your Robotics and Cybernetics ideas to let
> people decide on those as well.
> ---
I had a few and even sent an example for navigation to you.

> I thought u put it on there already in the upper part and I added it as a
> helper, but not essential for lower levels because for most of "western"
> history it wasn't seen that way.
> ---
> I did put it in there, but when you sent me the tech list you left it out.
> And I think that it would help for all levels. Western cultures simply
> didn't have a high level of psychology, so it couldn't help them.
> Meanwhile, eastern cultures had a higher psychology level so they knew more
> about this and it helped them.
> ---
Still It shouldn't be ness, ie hava a minimum percemtage for the lower levels.


> OK, I just think we should use my "randomness" modifier because otherwise we
> loose the ability for people to have non esential helpers for application
> techs which would increase the likelyhood of them learning it sooner, as
> well as the way I'd like to set up the "loss" of tech we discussed earlier.
> ---
> I fully agree with the tech loss system, and I made a differential equation
> that includes it. As for randomness, I think I have a compromise. Rather
> than simply being a computer generated random number that decides if you get
> the tech, there is an "inventor window" starting about 5% before the tech
> prerequisites. During that window, the computer checks social conditions to
> see if you have a society that encouraged invention. If you do, there is a
> large chance that the thing gets invented ahead of time. But if you have a
> repressive society, the thing will probably not get invented until you hit
> the prerequisite.
-----
What I mean is that the window won't appear until u hit the prereq, then it has a chance of learning prob based on social conditions as well as any helper application techs and the level of any applicable basic techs. The reason why it isn't invented until the prereq is aquired is because it will work much better for the loss of technology when it goes down below the min prereq. The way you seem to have it is that it could be learned before the prereq and if it goes below the prereq after it reaches the min prereq it would slowly become "lost" until it had to be relearned again. From what u posted earlier is sounds as if the chance of inventing and lossing the tech are on the same percentage scale, ie below the min prereq which doesn't make sence for gameplay.

> I don't see how randomness is required for helpers for application techs.
> But it is not a problem to assign other applications as helpers something.
-----
The way i had it in my previous model there were certrain techs that helped with development of other techs, but not required. Although this can be reduced a lot with basic techs, it shouldn't and can't be eliminated without affecting historical accuracy so much that it favors some ways of developing technology while saying that others were in essence wrong. Also doing so doesn't affect gameplay to such an extent that it needs to be overlooked for easier interface like some other things.
---------
Also another point one the reason for having techs such as Cybernetics and Robotics is that they will be used for near-future and far-future technologies if a person wishes to have either/or. I don't think there should be a double standard as it will complicate coding and could confuse the player.

[Mark_Everson]

Richard:

Thanks for getting it out! I'm still trying to get my mind around the system in general, but before I conk out completely there's one thing I don't quite understand. You say:

Agriculture
Determines the efficiency of your civ’s food production.
Prerequisites: 0%-X% Chemistry, Ecology, Geology, Mathematics
0%-69% Biology
70-X% Biology (70%)

it's clear to me the effect that biology at 70% has in your model. I have to say I don't like you're having brought back all the "hard" prerequisites, but I'll give you crap about that tomorrow . What is the effect of all the others that are just listed. So, for instance, if I am at the following levels:
Agriculture 47%
Chemistry 45%
Ecology 54%
Geology 43%
Mathematics 50% (i have to say i don't get what the heck this has to do with farming)

how do these different levels affect my ability to improve my agriculture 47%?

Cya,

Mark

[Richard Bruns]

Mark:
"So, for instance, if I am at the following levels:
Agriculture 47%
Chemistry 45%
Ecology 54%
Geology 43%
Mathematics 50%"
---
The agriculture tech would rise faster than it would if you were at Chemistry 37%, Ecology 42%, and Geology 35%. Those three helper techs allow you to gain a greater Agriculture percentage for every RP you spend. These are not needed, but if you tried to research Agriculture when they were all very low you would not raise the agriculture percentage as fast. By the way, Math was not in my original model as an agriculture helper tech. LGJ added it.

I should note that all helper techs are not equal. Some give a greater bonus than others. Also, the RP's required to raise a certain tech might not be the same as the RP's required to raise another tech by the same amount. Each tech will probably have different values input into the constants of the differential equation I listed.

LGJ:

Blacktop would just be a higher level of Cement, so it fits into that tech.

I don't think we can treat mapping and navigation as an application. It affects many things that a civ does, and the ability to navigate has historically risen like a basic tech does.

Psychology is not necessary for medicine. It just helps.

I contend that Robotics and Cybernetics are simply unnecessary for any time period. Any application of these two can easily be traced directly back to the basic skills of Mechanical Engineering, Computers, and Medicine.

You are right about the invent/lose problem. It can be fixed by not causing application loss until the tech drops below the inventor window. It actually makes sense to give the 5% margin of error, because once you figure out something you can still copy it pretty well even if you lost the knowledge that let you discover it.

The main thing I am trying to avoid is a situation where the prerequisite list said that the thing should be available, but the player does not get it. Any randomness should give the thing earlier, not withhold it after the prerequisites are reached.

[Mark_Everson]

Richard and LGJ:

Now that I've had a chance to read over the proposal and think about it a bit, I hopefully have something intelligent to say! My apologies on my question last night. The basic answer was there in the text, I had just missed it in my first quick reading of it.

First, I want to say that is a good and thought-provoking job. Although I don't agree with every position taken, the model certainlydoes a good job addressing many of the major issues the Clash Tech model faces. I'm going to try to focus on things that I think are really big in this post. There are a lot of little things I have comments upon, but those will have to come later. As for the things that the two of you disagree upon, and some modifications to what you have that I would propose, I think the most efficient thing would be to have an online meeting with the three of us together. There are a lot of things I think everyone agrees upon, and we don't need to discuss those much further. But for the contentious issues, we need to make decisions and move forward. I guess if we can't all agree, two votes out of the three would take any particular issue. I also have a lot of suggestions of mine that I've made before that didn't get into the model. I would like to bring those up for a vote one more time also. I'm available pretty much through 9 PM EST tonight if you guys are amenable to trying it today. After today, I will be tied up pretty much until next weekend.

Big issues (at least ones I think qualify)

Hard Prerequisites

I'm really dismayed to see the "hard" prerequisites come back. I thought LGJ and I had agreed that soft prerequisites were the way to go. I think the hard ones very rarely makes sense, and when they do, a soft prerequisites system can handle them just as well by making their "importance" very large. I'll use an example from your proposal...

For example, you need 70% in your Biology tech before you can advance beyond 70% in agriculture. This is because 70% Biology represents Genetic Engineering, and agriculture beyond 70% needs genetically engineered crop plants.

You are saying here that agriculture cannot progress At All beyond 70% without genetic engineering??? So in your opinion no amount of improved fertilization techniques, better farm machinery, better farm management methods, computerization, weather prediction, or other things could at all move that capability of the agricultural sector beyond 70%. IMO your arbitrary restriction has very little to do with how such things work in the real world. I believe that most "hard" prerequisites are equally untenable. Perhaps your notion was that Genetic Engineering should be very important in pushing agriculture beyond the 70% level. In that I agree with you. But that's not what your model does!

The other problem with hard prerequisites is that they put back in the type of micromanagement that you are trying to avoid in construction of your model. The player always needs to be attentive of whether this exact level has been reached... to make sure that whatever application they want to achieve can be gotten to. Can you see what I'm saying? If you just put the hard prerequisites in for the writeup, and planned on a different approach, then I retract all this...

Tech Diffusion and Trading

Can you give me an example of how you see the two of these working in your model? I'll save my comments until after the example.

R. P. creation

Very little was set about research point creation... do you have a canned discussion on that available? A lot of this has not been discussed in detail, and the time has come to put together at least a simple model of how this works.

Thanks for all the great work!

Mark

[Lord God Jinnai]

quote: Originally posted by Mark_Everson on 01-30-2000 11:24 AM I'm really dismayed to see the "hard" prerequisites come back. I thought LGJ and I had agreed that soft prerequisites were the way to go. I think the hard ones very rarely makes sense, and when they do, a soft prerequisites system can handle them just as well by making their "importance" very large. I'll use an example from your proposal... For example, you need 70% in your Biology tech before you can advance beyond 70% in agriculture. This is because 70% Biology represents Genetic Engineering, and agriculture beyond 70% needs genetically engineered crop plants. You are saying here that agriculture cannot progress At All beyond 70% without genetic engineering??? So in your opinion no amount of improved fertilization techniques, better farm machinery, better farm management methods, computerization, weather prediction, or other things could at all move that capability of the agricultural sector beyond 70%. IMO your arbitrary restriction has very little to do with how such things work in the real world. I believe that most "hard" prerequisites are equally untenable. Perhaps your notion was that Genetic Engineering should be very important in pushing agriculture beyond the 70% level. In that I agree with you. But that's not what your model does!

Ok Mark first off to your problem with the 70% as a final barrier without biology 70%, Rich forgot to say that there would be a phased in transition in his model from say 60-80%. The percentages can be playtested, but the facts reamain that for agricutlture atleast u need genetic engineering to get beyond certain percentage (U can read several previous postings I refered to the US vs France (which BTW doesn't use genetic engineering) and the agricultural levels.

I do however see your point about imrpoved fertilization, etc. That's what I was trying to address in the e-mail I posted.

quote: Originally posted by Mark_Everson on 01-30-2000 11:24 AM The other problem with hard prerequisites is that they put back in the type of micromanagement that you are trying to avoid in construction of your model. The player always needs to be attentive of whether this exact level has been reached... to make sure that whatever application they want to achieve can be gotten to. Can you see what I'm saying? If you just put the hard prerequisites in for the writeup, and planned on a different approach, then I retract all this...

Well there is that. Not everything will have only "hard prereqs". Also are u refering to level (% wise) or the application techs that that level refers to? If its the latter I can understand, however if its the former, there has to be a base minimum. Also just because u go below that minimum (in my way of thinking from how I've posted how tech loss/gain should be handled) doesn't mean u can't produce/use whatever. It does mean it won't be as good and will slowly decay till u can't produce and only maintain and evertually till u can't even maintain (assuming the basic tech continues to degrade). The way I would like it set would be to have those as the minimum prereq and the appropriate application tech which would be somewhat randomly (but mostly on technological/social conditions) be used as the soft prereq for most cases (a few like genetic engineering would still require genetics ).

quote: Originally posted by Mark_Everson on 01-30-2000 11:24 AM Tech Diffusion and Trading Can you give me an example of how you see the two of these working in your model? I'll save my comments until after the example.

Truth told, this hasn't been discussed much because we wanted to get the core system of how techs are gain via researching done first. That isn't to say that I (can't vouch for Rich) haven't thought about it.

First off, I'm not for trading of actual "application techs" unless the civilization already exceeds the min prereq (not just borderline, but exceeding them). This of course wouldn't work the way Rich has the model currently but would work in version. Anywayz that could only done with trade. Any other way (espionage, diffusion) would simply increase basic techs.

Diffusion should very very very much socialy affected. Not to say that new ideas can't come to societies that don't like those type of trends, but its very hard. The main way things should diffuse are for the most part from merchants, immigration (more social than tech), wars (monkey see monkey do, if its much better), tourism, and via major networks like the internet.

I think espionage should be pretty well understood by most. Just that the better ur network of spies, the more u get (assuming ur not caught beforehand).

Also if ur relying mainly on diffusion, etc. for gaining techs rathing than researching then u'll never get higher than say 15% below the max highest tech level for that apporpriate basic tech from the civ with the highest level ur getting it from. Also if its via diffusion and that civ is far away (communication wise) then it will be even greater.

Finally social advances will be much harder to diffuse, esp if they are completly the opposite of ur civs current values.

quote: Originally posted by Mark_Everson on 01-30-2000 11:24 AM R. P. creation Very little was set about research point creation... do you have a canned discussion on that available? A lot of this has not been discussed in detail, and the time has come to put together at least a simple model of how this works.

All I know right now is it will be exponetial in growth, based a lot on the economy and social model.

[Krenske]

Most of the techs mentioned in the lead message appear to be breakthrough techs. By this I mean that they themselves are not applications of the tech they are more like the theory behind the tech. Am I right on this?

If so, How do we handle the specific applications? Or are they all just amalgamated into percentages? For example I would like to see as many specific application techs as we can fit that will make sence if only for the educational and flavour values.

My list of application techs would include such things as (using fire arms for example)-
Fire stick - the most basic arrow firer, worse than a bow.
Arquebus matchlock - fires stones or wrought balls
Matchlock musket - increased firepower and mobility
Wheellock musket - increased firepower and mobility
Flintlock musket - not as good as wheel lock but cheaper
Rifling - improved range
Cast projectile - improved firepower and armour penetration
Wadding - improved firepower
Percussion musket - improved firepower and decreased enviromental effects
Breech seperation loading - improved defence decreased firepower
Cartridge concept - allows following techs and gives an increase in firepower
Breech lock loading -
Bolt lock - improved firepower
Magazine loading - improved firepower
High velocity powders - improved firepower / range
Smokeless powders - improves defence and continued fire accuracy
semi auto loading - M1 Garand
full auto reduced power - assault rifles

As you can see, a mass of potential applications and each requires specific advances in materials science or other areas. These techs developed over a 700 year period and the last of the incremental improvements is a major advance over the first. My point is that a number of these have considerable effects and a soldier would desire each more advanced one in preference to the previous. It is also not guaranteed that the basic knowledge gives the applications. The basic knowledge is built up slowly through the use of the scientific method (with some brilliance). The applications require the random brilliant spark. The example of this is gunpowder, China had it for 400 years and developed simple rockets. The europeans had it for a hundred and had arquebuses and were starting to use it in mining.

I see the actual application techs as being capable of being traded or spied out etc, while the basic techs and theoretical breakthroughs can't. Or at least not as easily as they require a transfer of knowledge and wisdom. You could even sell muskets to the natives while they themselves can not make them.

I also like the cultural awareness model but I see a few needs that may not be met by that part of the system. It does meet the needs of city improvements etc but cultural units is taking it a little far. Units or more specifically combat machines are some of the most rapidly developing technologies seen. As an example I give the short range low firepower interceptors of 1940 (spitfire etc.) vs higher firepower longer range fighters of 1942(zero) vs the long range, high firepower, high strike power, high defence fighter in 44 (P51, F4U) vs the very fast, very powerful jets in 45 (me262).

Now I can see that the tech for the 44 fighters existed in 40 but it was considered unnecesary. In war though the application rapidly spirals out to what is borderline possible instead of what is necessary. So I would like to see the ability of Players to apply much of this tech themselves by piecing together war machines from components. The components being allowed through the tech system. The machines themselves being created at the economic/strategic turn. As such the japanese can have a low defence high firepower long range zero, if they want it not because they are forced to, It would be up to the player what emphasis his weapons should have.

[Mark_Everson]

L. G. J. (and Richard to):

Hard Prerequisites...
If there is a fairly broad transition, like the type you cite, then I don't see it being as big a problem. I don't agree with your "fact" that agriculture can never get beyond 70% without genetic engineering. There are numerous differences between French and American agricultural practices, the most important of which IMO are institutional and cultural, Not Technological. I restate that without genetic engineering it would be Significantly Harder to get above 70%, but arbitrarily putting a wall there is IMO not reasonable. I can easily see a future society, that outlawed genetic engineering, have agricultural productivity that is much greater than our own through the use of other technologies that I outlined in my post above. Your current model fails utterly to model such a society and its technological progress. I agree there are some cases where there are essentially hard prerequisites. But in those cases a strong turn on of the importance over a narrow range of levels, as I think you mention is the actual plan, should work fine.

Micromanagement with respect to hard prerequisites...
I was primarily referring to the trip points in basic techs being so sharp, and relying on arbitrary sharp distinctions in other basic techs. Having the application techs be done automatically based on what is happening in the basic techs is the major model change, and I'm not griping about it at the moment. I have some reservations about it, but if we can work out everything else satisfactorily, it does have the advantages Richard is talking about.

IMO the methods for application technology social acceptance, and degradation based on loss of basic technology aren't completely there yet. I think it needs to include diffusion affects, and also have an effectiveness modifier crediting technologies that are currently in active use. I think in many cases, rather than the technology becomingly ineffective, it will simply lapse back to an "artisan" level. In this case the fundamental aspects of the technology are not understood, but the steps that are needed to put things together are still known. Your people would only truly forget technologies that were not in active use.

The current model doesn't give any credit for whether you actually use this thing actively in your civilization, or not. In my mind is clearly true that the level of refinement of the technology past a certain point relies on how many people are using it and under what circumstances. Although the level of basic technologies is important, it is only through continued use (and presumably refinement) that an application should reach its higher levels of effectiveness. So I think the improvement or lack thereof of an application should also take into account its level of use. For instance, making a lot of rifles and outfitting your troops with them would give you some credit, training with those rifles more, and actually using them in the field Much more.

Tech Diffusion and Trading...
I'm basically with you on this one. I think your point about relying on diffusion meaning you are always behind is basically correct. I think the magnitudes may be much less than what you're talking about though. Because of the very slow rate of change of technology and ancient civilizations, I think a more dynamic and innovative ancient society could pretty successfully sponge off others and be only a little behind. However, this is at the level of things that need to be checked out in play testing rather than determined now.

Krenske:

IMO most of your innovations are actually at the level of small steps in a basic technology called Firearms or something. I'm in favor of having some basic weapons technologies rather than a huge number of applications floating around. At your level of detail it would end up with us having thousands of applications, and I don't think anyone would learn much of anything from it...

All:

I think it's more important to get the basics of the model settled and agreed-upon before worrying about the details (and there are a lot of them I would like to address also). I propose that we use specifics only as examples of the general issues until we have the main things all agreed to. What you guys think?

[F_Smith]

Clearly a lot of work went into this. Ya'll are working hard!

But (and this is just me, again, only my preference), I can't stand the 'soft' prerequisite idea. It's my opinion that tech advance and tech 'skill' should be seperate. Techs come in leaps and bounds, as people suddenly see new combinations of old ideas (the 'eureka' effect). Skill grows over time. And high skill does not always equate to fast tech growth. The best ironsmiths in the world do not necessarily have the inside track to discovering steel.

I feel tech in history advances much in the way the show 'Connections' by James Burke shows it -- two old ideas combine to make a new idea. I understand you feel this creates a confusing tech tree, but a tech tree is (to me) no where near as confusing as first memorizing what each tech % means, and then trying to memorize the levels.

I think what ya'll are rolling in as basic tech level (like the discussion about agriculture level) is really 'skill/experience'. These things, to me, are totally seperate.

And, I think that is a system that will be played best by maximizing a bunch of numbers -- not my favorite type of game at all. Consider what will be required under this system. In order to decide where to put 'tech' points, you would have to look up all available tech % trees/ladders/whatever, and then decide which combinations would be required for all possible new breakthrus.

That said, this is still a good model. I just would prefer more realism, less number crunching. More 'hard' (realistic) prerequisites, less percentage-based abstractions.

[Lord God Jinnai]

F_Smith

About the skill issue your right and wrong at the same time. The greatest ironsmiths in the world might not know about steel production, but then again, the prob will because alloys have been in use since nearly after the discovery of copper. As far as the agriculture is concerned i have to say u are dead wrong almost. Sure there is a lot of experience involved, but that's not why the US is ahead. It is directly based on the fact that all crops and animals are genetically engineering to some extent or another in the US while elsewhere they aren't or aren't enough to make any differance. Look at politics and u'll see. There are tons of people claiming they won't eat genetically engineered food because they believe there is something bad about it. Scientifically that's not true, so long as u don't make anything bad genetically speaking.

Also most times techs don't come in leaps and bounds. They do sometimes but usually not. The "Eureka" effect is the exception rather than the norm.

As far as soft prereqs go, historically not having them would lead to less realism and we'd end up with a civ2 type infrastrcutre where consciption and refrigeration are linked. Its almost inevitable without having a huge number of techs.

Mark

Micromanagement with respect to hard prerequisites...

I kinda got lost in that section. Could u clarify it a little better. Also I'd like to know your thoughs on my proposal for solving the soft prereq problem.

[Richard Bruns]

I don't know how to quote things, so I'll cut and paste:
---
Mark Everson:

The current model doesn't give any credit for whether you actually use this thing actively in your civilization, or not.
---

---
Richard Bruns:

Tech Loss and Application Percentages

When you discover an application it is at 100% and you can use it normally. If you let the tech levels slide, the percentage of the application falls steadily . . . The application percentage for items or improvements can also grow as you manufacture that thing. This represents the greater knowledge of the thing that comes from practical experience.
---
I understand how you didn't see or notice that. The post was huge and I didn't elaborate on it. But I did mention that your application percentage grows as you make something. If you make it enough, you can keep the application percentage constant even if tech levels fell.

Mark: I did not choose to add hard prerequisites with the knowledge that you didn't want them. They were everywhere in the tech tree LGJ gave me, so I assumed they were standard. My tech tree uses many of the hard prerequisites he had; I have them as percentages instead of individual techs like he had. You do have a point about them being somewhat constraining.

If we decide against mandatory prerequisites, we can easily turn them into "hard soft prerequisites." It would be possible, but difficult, to advance without them. So if a helper tech at a certain percentage gives a 30% bonus to percentages gained per RP, a "hard soft prerequisite" at that same percentage would give a 200% bonus, which would basically mean that researching without it would take three times the effort. That seems like it could work, and it would address your valid concerns about micromanagement and history.

As I envision tech diffusion and trading, you can get any application from anyone. But if you don't have high enough tech levels, the techs decay like they would if you had found it yourself but lost the tech. So you could buy guns from more advanced cultures, but the application tech would decrease over time. It might be possible to use something so much that the application tech stays constant, but this would be hard.

If you were in the 'inventor window' when you acquired the tech, you would get it like it was invented by someone in your civ. And if you had high enough tech levels, you would have the thing anyway because I always give things to civs when they get the prerequisites. How does that sound?

F_Smith: What you propose would result in a tech tree similar to that of Civ 2. I explained in the first part of the model why this type of tree would not work. And as for players memorizing every percentage, we can't stop that. But in my model they do not have to memorize things. They simply know that if they keep researching Biology and Agriculture they will keep getting better farms. But with a normal tech tree they would have to consult a massive chart to see what tech they should research so they could eventually get Three Field Crop Rotation. They might find that they must research something like Metallurgy before they can rotate crops. (Matallurgy, Heavy Plow, Advanced Farming, Three Field Crop Rotation) This kind of thing seems very nonintuitive and cumbersome to me. Remember that we will have hunderds of techs while Civ 2 only had dozens. In my tree, all things come intuitively from basic skills; you don't have to navigate a web of techs.

---
LGJ:
First off, I'm not for trading of actual "application techs" unless the civilization already exceeds the min prereq (not just borderline, but exceeding them).
---
If you can exceed the prerequisites without getting the thing, then the prerequisites are totally meaningless. You would force the player to research the thing seperately or not let them get something until some random time after the prerequisites. Either way would make the game frustrating.

I think that tech diffusion would work best the way I described above. It allows you to steal or buy advanced applications from others, but you suffer a gradual penalty if your tech isn't advanced enough to use it properly.

Krenske:
I could assign prerequisite percentages for everything in your list, but I don't think it is necessary. That level of detail is, in my opinion, not worth the time or effort. One application can cover many of the many techs you listes. Remember that applications are not static. So the Musket application I listed would cover Fire stick, Arquebus matchlock, Matchlock musket, Wheellock musket, and Flintlock musket. This kind of progression is represented by the application percentage rising above 100%. It might help to read the crossbow example closely and replace "crossbow" with "musket."

Culture Tech Acceptance:

I sent an e-mail to LGJ regarding this very topic, but I can't find it. My e-mail archive is getting huge. I was thinking of putting it into a forum thread so I could search it by keyword. Also, the tech discussions would be available to anyone interested in how we decided things. Would that be okay? There is abut 300K worth of text in my archive.

[Mark_Everson]

LGJ:

Restatement of my "micromanagement with respect to hard prerequisites" section above...
1. It is in having enabling basic technologies that require precise percentages that I think the micromanagement in this model would be worse.
2. Whether an application technology is invented or not must IMO involve not only the level of basic techs but also:
a) diffusion effects (can we See someone else using it, if so how easy it is it to copy?),
b) social effects (if the merchants are on top in our society, then any transportation technology will probably be accepted almost immediately, if it is landed aristocracy, then transportation technology will probably be looked on much less favorably)
3. Whether an application technology flourishes, stagnates, or declines should involve:
a) social effects as above (which you already have in mind, just stating it to be complete)
b) active use of the technology (building something based on it)
4. If the basic technology required for a particular application technology declines, the artifacts built with that technology Will Not Necessarily Get Worse. It shouldn't get worse if the society is actively using and constantly building that item. People will no longer understand the "science" behind what they are doing, but they can usually keep making the same thing, and even improving on it by trial and error IMO. The forgetting part happens when the scale of the thing built is no longer practical (who needs an aqueduct for a city that is now down to 10,000 people). When the thing is no longer actively being built then the knowledge should be forgotten rather quickly.

No. 4 is why I think that we need something that keeps track of how often used a particular technology is. In an innovative society, and often-used thing will improve over time even without player intervention. This is what the last paragraph, just before "Techs Diffusion and Trading" is about. This is the skill part that F_Smith is talking about, and needs to be looked at separately IMO from progress in the basic tech. that's not to say that there is no feedback going the other way. There clearly is. But if the society is very traditional, or very little capital is left in the hands of the people by the ruler, the innovative feedback into basic technologies will probably be minimal IMO.

LGJ, you'll have to tell me specifically what "solution" to the soft prereqs you are speaking of. I can see at least three things that may be what you're talking about, and don't know which one you mean...

F. Smith:

I address your comments on skill in building something particular vs. general progress above. The same thing had been bothering me.

There is technological revolution, and then there is also evolution. The model here is trying to do both. If it turns out the revolution isn't handled satisfactorily, we can always take one step back and add in a bunch of revolutionary technologies like railroad, and the atom bomb. But for now let's see if it can work with railroad embedded in land transportation. In any case, it shouldn't come down to memorizing anything. I think the interface type that most players would prefer it is one where you assign priorities to a limited number of specific applications that you really want, and tell your adviser to "go get them for me". Seems a lot simpler to me than memorizing combinations of how to get to Monarchy, trade, and gunpowder in the quickest way.

Richard:

Oops, I missed the sentence on application percentage growing with manufacture! My apologies.

Yes, what you say about "hard soft prerequisites" is what I had in mind, and I think it will work well.

One thing I don't like now that we're talking about the area is that if some genius comes along and invents something "ahead of the curve" that it is automatically at 100%. If the number of supporting technologies are not there yet, I think the things should start out with some problems. For instance inventing rifling doesn't necessarily give you a "rifle" there was a long period of rifled muskets that, although better than normal muskets, were nowhere near what we think of as rifles. Probably I could think of a better example, but I'm in a hurry .

On the archive... personally, I'll rely on you guys to just grab something out of it.

[Krenske]

Mark

The "huge" number of innovations in firearms listed effectively cover a 700 year period. Assuming we have dropped to 2 year economic turns by that point, these inventions / improved applications are occurring once every 20 turns. By the time of the scale dropping to 1 year turns we will still be looking at 20 turn seperations of these inventions. This happens to mirror quite nicely the general and quite expensive process of reissuing new weapons to your armies that also appears to occur once every generation or 2 from the middle ages on.

The jumps in improvement offered by these new features can be quite significant. And in some situations are guaranteed battle winners. If a matchlock force fights a flintlock force in drizzel or damp situations then it loses, as simple as that, as the matches go out. Now there was a 10 year period in europe where outcomes like this were avoided by the matchlock forces just retiring if the weather conditions were not in there favour. It doesn't really work as a basic 1-2 % improvement as the historical impact of the seperate improvements translates to big differences.
Your basic similarly loaded soldier armed with a mini ball MLR from the US Civil War is at least 5-6 times more effective than a arquebusier when considering firing at short range alone. When you consider the fact that the MLR guy is also more mobile and greatly outranges his opposition it is even more pronounced. So unless ratings of 1000% etc for musket are to be found (with the percentages rapidly jumping) we need a number of the gradual improvements listed.

My next point is that these applications of the basic tech are not really slow considered improvements out of improvemetns in theory. They are in fact someones bright idea, the "eureka" factor.

I can see where this will be unwieldy but this has to be one of the more cluttered of the techs. Most other techs are less cluttered.
IE farming.
Plow, (requiring domestication) 1000 years
Seed drill, 500 years
Seed drill plow automated, (?) 1000-2500 years
fertilizer,
Moldboard plow
takes us from the begining through to 1830 odd.

There are other agricultural improvements but not directly related to the practice of farming crops. There is selective breeding etc but that has to do with biology and grazing. Within most techs there are only 5-6 of these applications and they are spread over a lot of time. Even in my firearms examples a number have nothing to do with the basic firearms tech and are actually based on chemistry or metal working techs (Cast bullets, smokeless powder, rifling).

Now that is the more scientific end of my reasoning. My more emotional point of view is that it will feel better for the player. They will receive a nice educational message and be given the choice of implementing the new invention etc automatically. They will have a greater sense of achievment than simply getting musket 212% over the top of Musket 211%.

These applications for the most part will not all need to be invented by the player as a large number will be traded, or just naturally spread across borders. (eg. Jim see's an enemy soldier fire at him with some new fangled gun that does not smoke all the time, Jim sneaks over there in the night and knocks off one of said guns. Ta da, the tech has spread. Actually Jim would probably just walk to the nearest enemy gun smith and buy a new gun. Merchants did not generally care about state secrets, and still don't)

A civ that has no contact at all with any other will not have the benefit of idea cross polination. They may have the basic tech but the applications themselves have not yet been discovered. (eg. Japan has the metallurgy skill, has gun powder but has no guns. It has remained seperate for ages and then 3-10 portugese sailors give a few arquebuses over to them. Within a 20 years there are so many firearms in japan that it is threatening the entire social structure.)

Sorry about the long winded post. Its just that I don't see historical improvemnt moving in slow small steps. There is indeed a slow buildup of theoretical knowledge and understanding. For the actual applications though there is normally jumps and these often ahead of the theory. EG animal husbandry well before even a remote idea regarding genetics.

[Krenske]

Richard,

I do not necessarily see there being a lot of prerequisites for each application. Many of these improvements have no prerequisite besides the base tech.

EG. Firearm, starts with firestick but all the following could immeadiately be available for discovery and application.
Matchlock
Flintlock
Breech Seperation loading (closely related to revolvers)
Bolt loading
Wheellock
Musket (effectively the addition of the stock)

All we need to do is skew the chance of discovery to get a roughly historical succession. Even historically things could be said to be out of whack. The wheellock was discovered before flintlock even though it is more complex. Breech seperation loading was discovered very early on then forgotten about for 300 years due to cost considerations.

Each of the techs would just need a base percentage of discovery. Some of the later developments will use these though as prerequisites.

(by the way the reason the wheel lock lost out to flint lock is cost. The flintlock is cheaper and the wheel lock is only marginally better. The wheellock was mainly used by cav in the matchlock period as the horses didn't like the naked matches touching them. In the game it would be difficult to see the wheel lock being used unless it is invented first.)

As I have mentioned above the firearms area would be the area with the most permutations to it.

[Lord God Jinnai]

quote: Originally posted by Richard Bruns on 01-31-2000 07:45 PM If you can exceed the prerequisites without getting the thing, then the prerequisites are totally meaningless. You would force the player to research the thing seperately or not let them get something until some random time after the prerequisites. Either way would make the game frustrating.

Not ro be harsh but your too has an equal if not greater problem that you can learn if before u reach the prereq, then the prereqs are meaningless, esp if one falls below that and they discovered there tech when the "inventor window" first appeared. It will also frustrate people the same way if they see another civ (through covert ops or through multiplayer and someone bragging) that another civ discovered it before they did and with less than they now have. All I'm saying is that for ease in model programing the min prereq should be that, the minimum, not abosulte, not "when a civ will definatly discover it no matter what the other factors, etc). If explained right the player should understand, we just have to make it clear. When they reach this threshhold I'd give them a base 10% + 1% for each applicable basic tech % point above the min prereq, modified by cultural attidudes. The numbers can change, but if done right it will make for a more realistic while still challenging and fun game.

quote: Originally posted by Richard Bruns on 01-31-2000 07:45 PM I think that tech diffusion would work best the way I described above. It allows you to steal or buy advanced applications from others, but you suffer a gradual penalty if your tech isn't advanced enough to use it properly.

You shouldn't be able to steal applications for the most part. Doing so would require u to 1> know what aplication techs the civ has 2> which ones u could possibly take (using mine or your model) 3> Successfuly stealing them afterword and because its a specific target it should be harder (and u'd have to specify which app tech). Even if u do steal it, its not an automatic gain like in civ2, or shouldn't be because it still requires ur people to understand it. Ir could prob be used in 2-3 turns.

quote: Originally posted by Mark Everson on 01-31-2000 1. It is in having enabling basic technologies that require precise percentages that I think the micromanagement in this model would be worse.

I replied Rich explained that pretty well.

quote: Originally posted by Mark Everson on 01-31-2000 2. Whether an application technology is invented or not must IMO involve not only the level of basic techs but also: a) diffusion effects (can we See someone else using it, if so how easy it is it to copy?), b) social effects (if the merchants are on top in our society, then any transportation technology will probably be accepted almost immediately, if it is landed aristocracy, then transportation technology will probably be looked on much less favorably)

a and b> definatly

quote: Originally posted by Mark Everson on 01-31-2000 3. Whether an application technology flourishes, stagnates, or declines should involve: a) social effects as above (which you already have in mind, just stating it to be complete) b) active use of the technology (building something based on it)

a> ditto
b> active practical use that isn't clouded in mystism. FE an acient culture developed nuclear power plant. They died out but left a few people who knew how to keep it running. Over several generations these people continue to teach there replacements and it begins to loose its importance technology wise only that it must be kept up or something like "Great Fire will Engulf the Land". Though the would actively be using the tech, no one would understand it except enough to perhaps keep from a nuclear meltdown.

quote: Originally posted by Mark Everson on 01-31-2000 4. If the basic technology required for a particular application technology declines, the artifacts built with that technology Will Not Necessarily Get Worse. It shouldn't get worse if the society is actively using and constantly building that item. People will no longer understand the "science" behind what they are doing, but they can usually keep making the same thing, and even improving on it by trial and error IMO. The forgetting part happens when the scale of the thing built is no longer practical (who needs an aqueduct for a city that is now down to 10,000 people). When the thing is no longer actively being built then the knowledge should be forgotten rather quickly.

I haveto disagree with u there, esp with the improvement part. Though trial and error might improve it, generally by the time its improved much of the reasoning of why is lost.
Also again I have to refer back to my previous reply on #3. Just because u actively use something, doesn't mean u can use it as good, in fact 9 times out of 10 (atleast) that's not true in the long run. For a turn or 2, prob won't make much differance, but after that even with constant practical and active use it will inevitably tend to degrade, unless the technology is brought back up.

quote: Originally posted by Mark Everson on 01-31-2000 No. 4 is why I think that we need something that keeps track of how often used a particular technology is. In an innovative society, and often-used thing will improve over time even without player intervention. This is what the last paragraph, just before "Techs Diffusion and Trading" is about. This is the skill part that F_Smith is talking about, and needs to be looked at separately IMO from progress in the basic tech. that's not to say that there is no feedback going the other way. There clearly is. But if the society is very traditional, or very little capital is left in the hands of the people by the ruler, the innovative feedback into basic technologies will probably be minimal IMO.

Yes that's true, so long as they know enough of how to use it.

quote: Originally posted by Mark Everson on 01-31-2000 LGJ, you'll have to tell me specifically what "solution" to the soft prereqs you are speaking of. I can see at least three things that may be what you're talking about, and don't know which one you mean...

I just posted some ideas and wanted to know what u/anyone else thinks is the best alternative and why its better.

As for myself I'm for a combination of what Rich just propose along with my use of the actual application techs to help speed things along.

quote: Originally posted by Mark Everson on 01-31-2000 There is technological revolution, and then there is also evolution. The model here is trying to do both. If it turns out the revolution isn't handled satisfactorily, we can always take one step back and add in a bunch of revolutionary technologies like railroad, and the atom bomb. But for now let's see if it can work with railroad embedded in land transportation. In any case, it shouldn't come down to memorizing anything. I think the interface type that most players would prefer it is one where you assign priorities to a limited number of specific applications that you really want, and tell your adviser to "go get them for me". Seems a lot simpler to me than memorizing combinations of how to get to Monarchy, trade, and gunpowder in the quickest way.

exactly, although i discussed having several of them seperate with rich already. He convinced me that it'd make the model to overly complex for little/no gain.

Also I really want to get resolved the main sticking point of when/how application techs are discovered. The reason I think mine would work better is there is a definate clear part where u begin to "slowly decay" in tech and a point where u can "discover" the appropraite application tech and those 2 are seperate so a person can't learn it when it should be in the level where it would slowly be decaying. Also it uses the minimum prereq system fairly instead of abusing it, since otherwise min. prereq means nothing if i can learn it before then.


Kereske:

U should ask the app model people if they need them. That's exactly why rich didn't want to post much in the way of application techs and items/improv/structures. Because he (and i do agree) wanted to know what everyone else will want/need and incorperate it into the model instead of forcing people to take something they might not want.