Technology System Version 5.2

[Mark_Everson]

Well, I vote for option 1 since its the one I've been pushing for all along. Surprise!

If you want, go ahead and try out the other in a more nuanced spreadsheet and see what you get. I had arguments against the square root thing before, but I can't even remember what they were. And since I'm leaving on vacation friday morning I don't have time for due diligence in this area.

Good Luck!

[Richard Bruns]

There wasn't any real debate about this topic. The current system was simply introduced and we all thought it was good.

Mark: Enjoy your vacation. I'll be going next week, so the spreadsheet will probably be the last thing I do for a while.

LGJ (and anyone else who is interested): Could you use the spreadsheet to test the system while we are gone? I mean really test it; try to crash the thing by manipulating RP's, tech attributes and constants, and default settings. When I get back, I want to know about anything that gives odd results. And if it survives a month of this testing, I'd say it should do pretty well.

[Richard Bruns]

While building the spreadsheet, I found a couple things that need to be changed. Previously, H and I only affected the excess RP's, the ones not needed for tech upkeep. I found that this can create problems. The marginal tech gain per RP will change a lot at the point where the tech change is zero. This creates instability, so I changed the equations so H and I affect all RP's produced. Tech growth is a lot more smooth now.

Also, I needed to introduce a change in the naming system. Previously there were two things that were called Levels. The most common use referred to the tech level that changed based on RP input. However, a tech's place in the 3-layer tech hierarchy was also called its level, as in "Level 2 Technology." To avoid confucion, the tech's place in the hierarchy will now be called Tier, as in "Tier 2 Technology."

I sent the new spreadsheets and their instructions to Kull to be posted on the Clash web site.

[Stuff2]

I was reading a book about technological history today and some things did come to my mind.

One is that the 'research' has in some periods been concentrated in mysticizm and religion and stuff like that and in other periods of time concentrating on the actual reality.
It was also clear that when empires was getting bigger they also often got more decadant. Decadance in science had several reasons.
1. Slavery
There has in history been a big connection between slavery and lack of scientific research. Mainly beacouse you don't have to develop industrial techs as long as you have slaves, and slaves work better the less they know.
2. Economic system
It was first in the european renasissance when the economic system got more and more capitalistic the scientific research started to get a real boost.
3. Power.
Priest and aristocrats was concentrating on keeping the lower classes surpressed and a way to do that was to hold on to a conception of the world that justified their power.
4. convinience.
When the higher classes was satisfied with their lives noone was interested in research, except the poor people that was to uneducated and to hardworking to care about stuff like that.

One other thing that was striking was how big civilizations not only beacome decadant they also became more concentrating on keeping their own population content rather than improve their weaponry. Nomadic barbarians on the other hand was almost totally concentrating on military improvement and time after time took over the power of their bigger but military weaker neighbours. Then these 'barbarians' eventually became big decadent civilizations that within some centuries was eithier falling apart in smaller nations or overrun bye barbarians. (usually both).

Considering this I really do think that big civilization (atleast before living in a capitalistic economy) should get scientific penalties in some form.

[Richard Bruns]

Stuff2: I agree with all of your points, but I do not agree that research penalties should simply be assigned based on size. A small civ can be just as decadent as a big one and size does not automatically lead to decay.

All of the things that you mentioned are covered to some extent in the social model. The attitudes of the various social classes will have an impact on research. Decadence in the civ will affect research as well as many other civ activities.

I agree that excessive size should be punished, especially if the size is due to conquest. But I do not agree that the tech model is the proper model to punish this size. The social and riot models should be the places where size is punished. Rather than assigning arbitrary research penalties, we should go to the source of the issue and work in the social model.

Also, don't forget that our diminishing returns system of province RP generation gives very little benefit to huge civs. If you look at my post near the top of the thread, you will see that a small civ with good infrastructure will produce more RP's than a large civ with bad infrastructure.

I am not especially familiar with the guts of the social model. Stuff2, if you know both models it would be great if you could make a proposal for the details of the interaction of the social and tech models. That way you can make sure that these issues and many others are dealt with as seamlessly as possible.

[F_Smith]

Lordy:

Please realize, this is just my opinion. I understand if you disagree with me.

From my standpoint, I intend to eventually (this is not a top priority, it'll be at least a month before I can get to it) code up an alternate tech system that spreads tech based upon lines of communication. The RPs will be in individual mapsquares, possibly even by individual ethnic groups. Everything those EGs take part in, they will have a chance for innovating a better way (based upon all sorts of factors, of course, including their access to education and entertainment, the % of the rewards that will be theirs -- the 'private property' govt policy, and a lot of other factors. If a mapsquare will check all mapsquares it has contact with, and try to adopt any tech that they find that they want/need, based upon a million factors. The leader will be able to influence this spread in several ways, including by financing a 'research' place (temple/craftsman shop/forge/university/whatever). You could build 'Stonehenge' and get a boost in astronomy tech. That kind of thing. As far as providing techs to soldiers, that's an economic question of buying and supplying weaponry. I believe that is how it worked/works.

And as I said, this is only going to be an option. Yours will be the default tech system.

* * *

Also,

However ya'll end up coding the tech will be fine, I'm sure.

The only point I'm really going to make now about coding is that just remember, 'the developers aren't done until all the tests run'. The coding of the model isn't done until you can watch a tech change cause a value change in exactly the way ya'll want it to act.

* * *

I'm sorry, I was assuming that this tech system will be able to be customized to include magic 'techs', futuristic 'techs', and user-defined 'techs'. I may be mistaken.

[Lord God Jinnai]

This system will come with pre-defined futuristic techs as well as being able to handle user-defined techs.

As far as magical things is concerned, I personally don't mind seeing something for it added on once everything else is taken care of, ie more-or-less and addon since most people i know will likely play it a lot more then.

[Richard Bruns]

F_Smith: I think I know what you want, and I think the current system already provides it. Here is what I think you are saying:

1) People should do research themselves, and they should work on what they need and what they are good at. The ideas they come up with are then spread to the rest of the civilization.

2) RP generation should depend on communication.

3) The tech system should interact with other models to define how tech levels are used.

We have already dealt with number one with the plan for "tagged RP's." The basic idea is that every activity within the civ generates RP's that are used only for techs related to that activity. So a farming province generates lots of RP's that are used to advance farming techs. The current model assumes that all provinces are doing this simultaneously, so at the end of the turn all of the RP's are combined (after a diminishing returns system that simulates duplicated effort) and the civilization's tech levels are adjusted.

We do not have a detailed plan for RP production. But we have agreed on the following principles:

An RP is anything that would serve to improve something that the civ is doing. They are generated by research or basic activities, which represents innovation within the civ. They also can be generated by contact with other civs, which represents acquiring knowledge from others.

RP's are not a commodity that can be stored. They are generated anew every turn, and all RP's that are generated are spent the same turn.

The effects of communication within the civ are dealt with after RP's are generated. Some research and innovation efforts are duplicated, so the RP's are essentially lost. For more details on this, look at the diminishing returns discussion above.

Speaking of duplicated effort, I don't think we need to work on competing tech systems. New suggestions can be and have been incorporated into our system. We can still be flexible, so if you suggest improvements to the current model we will consider them.

Your ideas are seem mostly centered on RP production, so could you make an RP production model that fits with the current system? This would allow you to include your ideas in the system without changing or redoing the whole thing.

I think that the tech model should work to define the use, application, and effect of technologies. Tagged RP's are used for the interface between the tech model and the other models. This page has discussion about the uses of tagged RP's, and so does the previous thread.

If my assumptions about you believe are wrong, please let me know.

By the way, have you looked at the tech system spreadsheets I made? I think that they would help you understand the system better and give you a chance to test out the system and see if it works as it should.

[F_Smith]

Richard:

Actually, it's very healthy for this game to develop several different versions of each game model and then including them as options. Don't worry about wasted effort, my approach will only take about a month to do something like techs.

While we are after systems that do similar things, the radical difference in our approaches has produced radically different systems that will play quite differently. I see this as a bonus to game players.

There is one basic difference -- different mapsquares can have different levels of techs, even within the same Province/Civ. My approach will have pockets of innovation, and tech will spread/diffuse out from there. Ya'lls approach, I believe, assumes all members of a civ have the same tech level.

I like the idea that in a province, the city dwellers might be significantly more technologically advanced than the provincials.

Research and innovation will happen in specific places, in my approach, not on a 'civ-wide' macro level. You can build a highly sophisticated urban 'Rome' type city, and still have far-flung provinces that are far from 'modern'. This, to me, sounds fun.

I believe I understand your tech system very well. It works well, from a 'big-picture' approach, altho it is not really based in a mapsquare world. I just have taken a different approach, and 'localized' things.

[Lord God Jinnai]

I think we shouldn't have differn't versions of various models, with maybe a few exception, tech model isn't one of them. However, working on altertatives to show how it might be better and combining them to make 1 good model is fine. In the end, i think 1 underlying model with flexibility for various scenerio designers is the key. There is such as thing as 'too many choices.'

Anyway I was thinking about something....something which F_Smith said and got me thinking...

The core idea comes from many of the fantasy books/games i read/play. In many cases the wizards and whatnot are seperate entities like religions, not beholden to any civ in general. I was thinking we could do a variation on this idea for the tech model.

Of course over time, if a civ can develope its own technology, this entity's power will erode or even disappear unless it to innovates. Right now, all tech is handled via the civ. I'm just saying this as a possinbility to add depth. I mean you have this groip who sell items to you for profit for them to develope better weapons and items. They also would have great sway in tech developements of every civ to make sure no one threated their superiority.

Whatcha think?

[Mark_Everson]

Hi Gentlemen:

Might I suggest that the dueling systems here seem to differ in only one regard, the span of geography over which technology is considered the same. I propose that both models can be coded simultaneously. At least as far as I can tell the same methods would be used, it just depends how much you aggregate things before calculating RPs, and the hunk' o' geography to which you ascribe a Tech object. When the basics are coded, it would only be the matter of a few hours to put in the switches necessary to handle the technology system at any of the civilization, province, or map square level. Can we agree that that's a smart way to start out?

My personal guesses that we will then find out that anything lower than the province level for handling tech is prohibitively expensive in terms of clock cycles and memory usage. But, F. Smith, if you want to spend the time modifying the code, it's only potentially your wasted time.

LGJ:

I don't think there would be anything stopping us from tacking on that sort of thing at a future date. Right now, though, we don't even know for sure if the basics of the system work, so it seems premature to talk extensively about this.

[Lord God Jinnai]

Actually I don't think it should be very hard. It could be based off corperation/guilds in the Economic Model when that part is done.

Hell, we could expand it beyond to military for groups like SeeD in FF8 that are an orginized military mercanary force. We could really enhance a game with this idea. I mean many models could have a counterpart that is its own seperate entity(entities) that work outside civ control and have their own agendas. Hey we could even spruce of GWRs with this.

[Illmuri]

Idle thoughts:
-
I know its a bit old by now, but what was decided on roads helping tech etc? If you dont want them to just make road after road and abuse it, have it find the max amount of RP to take in, then shave off a % from certain areas if they dont have good communication (roads, etc). Building roads just gets you back to full, but after that you just have infrastructure in place doing nothing but givin your troops somethin to do (a useful tactic in peacetimes, but that last bit on troops is just rambling).
-
Oh my, go axi go! Axi is a role model to all. Good job!
-
Well, I had more ideas, but I actually went through and read the threads, answering questions etc. Most ideas have been forgotten by now *doh*
-
Im not sure about small civs and big civs and how many RPs they get, but civs that fall behind should get a bonus. That post on comunication with another civ and proximity etc was right on. If someone has more tech, being close to them should up you RP collection (suppose its just from the fact that you have an idea what you want to learn, and work towards it, much faster than accidently findin it).
-
Ive seen a lot on not everyone adding to reasearch because of communication, but what about the other way? I mean, unlike civ, where you find "computers" and bam, everyone knows it, it took time for computers to be in "every" home etc. So if it fits somehow (this is just a rough idea, and not tailored to this specific game), maybe they find something new, levels go up, whatever, and over time, the benefits from it could go up, depending on other things (I sure use too many commas). Like having a nation that has many good horsemen (Mongols), they didnt start that way, over many years though, the horses helped cause they used it.
-
Hmm, most of these thoughts arent really thought out, I have the bad habit of making things up as fast as I type.
-
That fits in on that little post on people with better cavalry than others, I suppose you could implement this if you can think of a way.
-
Im not a programmer, and Im just a little kid in high school, so I dont have years of studying history etc that would really help me on making intelligent contribution.
-
I hope I havent just wasted your time on this, and maybe some little detail hasnt been suggested (I havent quite read all on tech, going to next).
[This message has been edited by Illmuri (edited August 05, 2000).]

[Lord God Jinnai]

quote: Originally posted by Illmuri on 08-05-2000 07:19 PMI know its a bit old by now, but what was decided on roads helping tech etc? If you dont want them to just make road after road and abuse it, have it find the max amount of RP to take in, then shave off a % from certain areas if they dont have good communication (roads, etc). Building roads just gets you back to full, but after that you just have infrastructure in place doing nothing but givin your troops somethin to do (a useful tactic in peacetimes, but that last bit on troops is just rambling).

The way roads will help the tech system is to increase rp production because of better communication and transporation from point to point, mainly cities and other strategic locations. That means you can go out and build all the roads you want, affecting the enviorment in a negative way and do sh*t after you got the best routes to and from each place taken care of, but hey, no ones stopping you!

quote: Originally posted by Illmuri on 08-05-2000 07:19 PMWell, I had more ideas, but I actually went through and read the threads, answering questions etc. Most ideas have been forgotten by now *doh*

Yeah, hate when that happens...Anyway no rush. I doubt we'll have a breakthru tommorrow, maybe the next day though

quote: Originally posted by Illmuri on 08-05-2000 07:19 PMIm not sure about small civs and big civs and how many RPs they get, but civs that fall behind should get a bonus. That post on comunication with another civ and proximity etc was right on. If someone has more tech, being close to them should up you RP collection (suppose its just from the fact that you have an idea what you want to learn, and work towards it, much faster than accidently findin it).

If you mean it should because of communication and the eventual spread of technology, yea that's already taken care of. However, just because 1 civ is seen as more advanced doesn't ness. make the lower-tech civ want to spend more on its advancements...this depends on the ethnic/religious modifiers as well as politics.

quote: Originally posted by Illmuri on 08-05-2000 07:19 PMIve seen a lot on not everyone adding to reasearch because of communication, but what about the other way? I mean, unlike civ, where you find "computers" and bam, everyone knows it, it took time for computers to be in "every" home etc. So if it fits somehow (this is just a rough idea, and not tailored to this specific game), maybe they find something new, levels go up, whatever, and over time, the benefits from it could go up, depending on other things (I sure use too many commas). Like having a nation that has many good horsemen (Mongols), they didnt start that way, over many years though, the horses helped cause they used it.

Already taken care of...or well atleast we plan to. I believe it has though.
quote]Originally posted by Illmuri on 08-05-2000 07:19 PMIm not a programmer, and Im just a little kid in high school, so I dont have years of studying history etc that would really help me on making intelligent contribution.[/quote]Everyone's welcome to express there opions. All we ask is read the models and current discussion so you know what's going on.

[Lord God Jinnai]

Cont from other thread:

quote: The idea I like is that the individuals in each square do their own 'tech' advancement and innovation. The player wouldn't 'spend' RPs, but instead build/fund research centers that would innovate on their own. Then tech can spread like a 'disease', and farmers/producers (depending on available resources) would adapt to and use the newest tech they know about. So tech would 'spread' out from 'innovative' areas. Certain ethnic groups can be more 'innovative', as a cultural trait. Increasing the amount of 'education infrastructure' in a mapsquare would increase the innovation of those people. Etc.

You're idea has one very major flaw in it. This isn't how tech works for most of history. Rulers didn't fund research centers or the like. They might have things researched, but generally that would be at the capitol or other major city, usually outside his control. The effects were very targeted, FE a new weapon. Once that occured, research was shut down.

As to the spreading, it doesn't work like that generally. First off, cities will learn of it and use most technology before rural areas, usually learning via merchants. Second, military tech cannot be handled this way since once a new technology is found that wants to be incorperated the local ruler will attempt to fit all his troops with this new technology. The same holds true for many ideas, only limited to the econimics and practicality.

Also you weren't looking at what I was saying i think. RP production doesn't care for specific areas usually. Also it must all be recalculated every turn. This is why its better to get all the numbers for a general area than each mapsquare because RP production is based on virtually everything done in an civ, ie farming adds more agricultureal/farming RPs, building road between to cities add Transportation/Land RP and Communication RP as well as maybe Economic RP, building and training troops adds many differnt types depending on the actual RP. A lot of this can't be handled at the mapsquare level either.

As to ethnic groups innovation level, increasing it may help, then again it may not. This also depends on IoR and its innovation level for the people and also if they distrust government and generally very low innovation groups it will have no/min effect on because they keep their kids away or teach them outside schools differntly.

quote: One other thing: (quote) The thing is, atleast in my view, the Tech model doesn't handle that. It handles on the development of technologies, basic and application. Its up to the other models to see how they are used, for farmers its up to the economic model. (endquote) I couldn't disagree more. You may remember my vocal disagreement on this topic. A basic definition of techs is actually similar to the basic definition of various ethnic groups, or religions, a civs, or rulers (like in the beast). That is not a system. That is actually a function of scenario designers. For example, scenario designers can add their own 'techs', can't they? Like a 'fire magic' tech? Granted, we can pre-define a bunch of techs to ease the job of scenario designers, but that is not the same thing as doing work on the model. A tech 'system' will have to define how techs interact with the other code. How will the increase of a farming tech cause the farming code to increase farm output? Until you've decided upon the specifics of how things will be implemented (clearly the hardest part), the tech system won't be 'done'. Until I finish the 'turn' methods for the object builder beast, I am not done with the Population and Government models. Likewise for the tech model.

Don't exactly remember that disagreement...just that you thought it should be programed in OO...

I don't exactly understand what you mean by "basic definition of techs." Yea application techs can be created by scenerio designers, though i don't know about basic technologies, atleast not completely new branches, maybe sub-branches.

Can you explain yourself again why its so wrong, espically in light of what i just said earlier?

Also i don't know about "fire-magic" tech...