Um no what i meant was not seperate "basic" techs, but seperate techs that u
need certain percentage prereq on basic techs but because of there
revolutionary changes should be researched seperately that just getting to a
certain percentage.

> I don't understand. What else did you need?

Military Tech Model and anything you do happen to have on social advances

Also on the prereqs where they change as they advance FE water transport,
the affects should be gradual buildup. So its at 50% when you need metal
working from what the chart reads, well from 40-60% you could still research
it w/o metal working, but it would becaome increasingly difficult.

Also we need to decide how RP are produced and used since based on an
earlier e-mail i sent some will have to be used to keep the current level of
tech from eroding.

> Biology (Organism Structure)
> 0%-None-50%-Optics(*20%)-80%-Computational Hardware (*70)r-100%
> ---
> You are right that the 80-100% addition is needed, but wouldn't
Electronics
> be more suitable? That would also cover things like electron microscopes.
> ---
Perhaps

> Chemistry-Alchemy
> Chemistry
> 0%-Alchemy-20%-Mathematics (*1)-100%
> ---
> I do not have alchemy as a seperate tech. It is simply a low level of
> Chemistry.
> ---
Heres the reason why: Alchemy isn't chemisty. It's prechemisty. Alchemist
basically used trial and error for the most part to come up with formulas.

> Ecology
> Ecology, Theory of Evolution, Greenhouse Theory
> 0%-Biology, Geology-100%
> Decreases the environmental impact of your civ's actions.
> ---
> Why does your knowledge of the internal structure of an organism affect
yur
> knowledge of the way an ecosystem works?
> ---

Because it helps to determine how and why creatures act and live like they
do and also how they evolved.

> Geology
> Oil Drilling
> 0-Mathamatics-100%
> ---
> My reasoning for combining Ecology and Geology that are both aspects of
> Planetary Science. This is the theoretical side of the field, and the
> application that I forgot to include was Resource Gathering. Sorry for
the
> confusion. If you still think it would be better to split them, that
would
> be fine.
> ---

Geology deals with rocks, minerals, etc while Ecology deals with organisms
and their eviroments. While geology does affect ecology, it is not
exclusive and ecology really doesn't affect geology.

> Brick/Cement/Stone (Not sure if ness)
> ---
> I thought you would need this for both Architecture and Roads. What else
> would determine the ability to make stone buildings and pave roads?
> ---

I guess adding mortar and renaming it "Building Materials" or "Construction
Materials" will be fine.

> Portable Power Generation
> 0%-Genetics-30%-Mechanical Engineering(*30%) Power Generation (*30),
> Chemistry-100%
> ---
> The Power Generation 30% requirement is redundant. Power Generation
already
> requires Mechanical Engineering and Chemistry, so you gain noting by
adding
> it. If it is the specific percentage you are concerened with, we can
always
> adjust it. These are rough estimates.
> ---

Well thing was that Power Generation required the same level of mechanical
engineering which imo wasn't right since portable power generation requires
more advanced techniques.

> Space Travel
> 0%-Portable Power Generation(*85%), Physics-Mechanics(*85%), Electronics,
> Air Travel (*20)-100%
> ---
> Air Travel 20% is like a World One biplane. How would you not have that
if
> you already have the high requirements already there? But you are right
in
> that Air Travel would help. It can be a non-prerequisite helper.
> ---

Well um yes your right. I was thinking thinking it was about that time
rocketry came into being although it was WWII and there is some need for air
travel because you need to know how to travel through the atmosphere to get
into space.

> Water Transport--Access to water
> ---
> How is this different? Did something get cut off?

> Um no what i meant was not seperate "basic" techs, but seperate techs that
u
> need certain percentage prereq on basic techs but because of there
> revolutionary changes should be researched seperately that just getting to
a
> certain percentage.
> ---
> Could you give an example of one of these that would really be important
> for gameplay? I am trying to have as little complexity as possible. When
> my roommate saw me working on the tech model, he thought that it was
> ridiculously complex. And he is a very intellegent person who is good at
> computer strategy games.
> We are trying to condense over 4000 years of the advancement of humanity
> into a tech model that is simple enough do deal with in a game. We will
> need to ignore literally hundreds of revolutionary advances. A few dozen
> general fields that progress over time is, in my mind, the only hope for
> modelling this. We have to be as simple and general as possible.
> For example, consider the tech of Explosives. I considered adding it,
but
> then decided not to. It is too small and it does not help much. I made
> the simplifying assumption that your skill in explosives would be the same
> as your Chemistry skill. Thus building cannons would require a certain
> percentage in Chemistry and Metallurgy, and your cannons would improve as
> those two techs did. A seperate tech for Explosives would only complicate
> the tech tree.

I'm talking very major ones like industrialization. This had a profuound
inpact on almost every aspect of society. I'm trying to find a book or
article with the top 100 or something advances in our history and then take
a select few from that. Besides from whats been said on the forum and such
esp Mark, he wants a combination of both with about 60 techs seperate from
just being able to be obtained cuz you reached a certain level. 20 of which
would be future techs.

We also don't want it be too simple.

> Military Tech Model and anything you do happen to have on social advances
> ---
> After coming up with an elaborate system for military technology, I
> decided to scrap it. Rather than having a Personal Weapons tech, I
thought
> it would be better to simply assign prerequisites and dependencies for
> individual applications. Thus your artillery depends on Metalurgy,
> Chemistry, and to a lesser extent Physics(Mechanics). Rather than clutter
> up the tech tree with techs that have only one application, I thought it
> would be better to trim the tree to the essentials and have individual
> applications depend on those essentials.
> I say keep the social tree you already have; you did a good job. Only
use
> non culture specific techs like we talked about earlier.

What about the stuff such as indivisual weapons like katana or rifle? From
what the military model suggests they are relying heavily on the abilty to
"personalise" units. I know these wouldn't ness be tech advancements but
more of improv or items obtained from the current tech which brings me to
the point of what do you have in that area?

> Also we need to decide how RP are produced and used since based on an
> earlier e-mail i sent some will have to be used to keep the current level
of
> tech from eroding.
> ---
> I thought that was already decided. I liked the idea of having to spend
> RP's based on the level of the tech. As you learn more, you have to
> increase the effort to increase your knowledge to things that are harder
to
> learn. Also, you have to constantly spend RP's to keep techs at their
> current level. This too is based on tech.
> So we have a differential equation of the form dP=(RP-a(bP^n))(c/(dP)^m)
> where a, b, c, d, n, and m are constants, P is the current percentage and
RP
> is the amount of RP's spent on that tech.
> 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
> inreases.
> Does that sound okay? The numbers will have to be determined by
> playtesting.

Yea but also if the amount of RP spent is more than enough to raise it a
percentage is should be carried over to the next to see if can raise it more
than 1. If not the excess could act as a cushon for the next turn.

> I guess adding mortar and renaming it "Building Materials" or
"Construction
> Materials" will be fine.
> ---
> There are other building materials like metal that have nothing do do with
> this tech. Also paving and roads, as well as construction, are a big
> application of this tech. I would prefer that names be as accurate and
> descriptive as possible, even if they don't sound good. But adding mortar
> is a good idea.

well for coding thats fine, but it needs a better name for the user
interface

> Well thing was that Power Generation required the same level of mechanical
> engineering which imo wasn't right since portable power generation
requires
> more advanced techniques.
> ---
> You are right. But wouldn't it be easier and less confusing to make the
> Portable require a higher level of the existing prerequisites, rather than
> adding new prerequisites?

We also don't want it be too simple.
---
Quote from my original e-mail:
"Specific applications have percent prerequisites in one or more techs, as well as other possible requirements. For example, a Fission Power Plant would need something around Power Generation 60%, Chemistry 80%, Physics-Electromagnetics 70%, and Access to Uranium. The exact percentages will have to be determined by playtesting. Until then, I could guess at whatever you wanted to build. Send me a list of what you want included and I will make a list of tech prerequisites for that thing."

Industrialization is a specific application, not a tech. It is a social choice made possible by certain levels of technology. I would say Industrial Engineering 30%, Communication Systems and Media 40%, Civil Engineering/Infrastructure 40%, and Power Generation 40%. Once you get these levels of tech, you have the option of choosing Industrialization. Either that or your people do it automatically; I don't know what the social model people will eventually decide on.

I think that the tech tree should only contain broad categories of knowledge or skills that affect many things. Any specific application is a single thing that has certain prerequisites. Just send me a list of these specific things and I will give them prerequisites. I don't yet know exactly what you want.

All future techs are simply higher percentages of current basic techs. As
for specific things like Cybernetic Medicine, I can create a list of
prerequisites for what we decide to include.

I think that the tech tree should only contain broad categories of knowledge
or skills that affect many things. Any specific application is a single
thing that has certain prerequisites. Just send me a list of these specific
things and I will give them prerequisites. I don't yet know exactly what
you want.
---
I'll prob do that tommorrow or Friday once i review what's here and what is
in the tech model i gave u.

What about the stuff such as indivisual weapons like katana or rifle? From
what the military model suggests they are relying heavily on the abilty to
"personalise" units. I know these wouldn't ness be tech advancements but
more of improv or items obtained from the current tech which brings me to
the point of what do you have in that area?
---
Leather Armor: Fabric/Leather *10%
Curballi: Fabric/Leather *20%, Metalworking *10%
Mail Armor: Metalworking *25%
Plate Armor: Metalworking *40%, Mechanical Engineering
Spear: Woodworking *2%, Metalworking
Sword: Metalworking *20%
Longsword: Metalworking *35%
Katana: Metalworking *60%
Bow: Woodworking *5%
Composite Bow: Chemistry *15%
Crossbow: Mechanical Engineering *25%
Musket: Chemistry *30%, Metalworking *30%
Rifle: Chemistry *40%, Metalworking *40%, Physics(Mechanics) *30%
Hand Grenades: Chemistry 40%
I am confident that anything we need can be placed in my tech tree like
this. Just send me lists of what to include. Again, the percentages are
approximate. They will most likely have to be adjusted for game balance.
---

I have no argument with that last statement and i fact think it should,
again the exact percentages/techs may vary. In general if you can think of
something that isn't a tech advancement or social advancement but is
important, it prob belongs in this category. FE automobiles do, but
automotive technology or whatever u think it should be called wouldn't fit
there.

Again with that I'll try and have some ideas for you when i send what i can
compile with the rest of the stuff. You will prob haveto do a lot with the
more currect militay items/improvements since i know more about the older
military battling systems.

I don't see why we have to confine ourselves to integers. If you have, say,
32% one turn and you research a little, you get 32.17% the next turn. If
you then put a huge investment into the tech, you can raise it to 33.59% by
the next turn. The percentages are recalculated every turn and an exact
value dispayed.

That's fine, but we still have to have an end point i mean otherwise we
could end up with an intiger that never ends (6.66666...). Also if we do
use intigers we might want to do a little more tweaking with the model later
on. FE having a requirement at 29.3 or something. Again don't worry right
now that's for play testing.

well for coding thats fine, but it needs a better name for the user
interface
---
I knew that all along. But the name should tell exactly what it is.

And "Construction Materials" doesn't how? I know you mentioned the fact
that this doesn't include metal constuction materials (as well as wood) but
can you think of a better name?

What's wrong with that? The steam engine was running factories before it
powered railroads. Electric turbines were around before cars.
As a general strategy, we can set the timing of things by setting the
prerequisite percentage. Something that needs Metalworking 30% will
probably come before something that needs Metalworking 50%. But if the
players do not need to research the 30% thing, then they don't have to. We
may see that in our history the 50% thing developed as a result of the 30%
thing, but it did not have to be that way. At the most basic level, it was
the result of societal need and the ability to make it. The players choose
the need, and the tech tree provides the basic tools. I don't want to lock
people too tightly in our history. They should be able to choose their own
technological destiny, within reason. That is one reason I want to keep the
tech tree loose and flexible.
---
Again, the barriers of language come into play *O* I thought u meant
portable as in the laptop computer vs a desktop computer.

Oh! I forgot you don't have gunpowder in there that i could see, unless its
in the military part which it shouldn't be atleast to begin with since its
first uses were for fireworks.
---
That one was another one I left out intentionally. Any use of explosives
can be traced directly back to your Chemistry level. It is not entirely
accurate, but it works.

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

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

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

I'll reply with the rest later

--- New Mail ---

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

--- New Mail ---

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

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

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

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

Like i said it didn't sound exactly right.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That particular scenerio might work, however it would be dependant upon the
current proposal for the character model (see the poles i am having put up
in a day or so). Also the diff in the way the model would work would be
that say 15% would be listed as the minimum prereq istead of 25 because that
way we could incorperate the reverse part of my model, the idea where just
because u go below the prereqs doesn't mean its automatically forgotten, but
more gradual.

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

I agree 1000%

> the home and garden section of the bookstore, you will find dozens of Feng
> Shui books. And as for the problem of one philosophy being higher than
> another, you are right. I would suggest that the player not direct
> philosophical stuff at all. I would like to see it be developed by your
> people without your influence. It would follow the conditions I outlined
in
> my first tech proposal about inventors. I think philosophy should develop
> without player interference, so you get the feeling that your people are
> real and unique. But everyone else seems to want to order the people to
> think a certain way and tell them what philosophy to invent.

> We will just have to see what people think. But I think that people will
> agree to sims that are somewhat culturally autonomous. But for this to
> work, the cultural tech tree will have to be nonlinear. Any philosophical
> idea should be able to be discovered without he presence of any other.
Just
> make societal prerequisites for everything, with other philosophies as
soft
> prerequisites at most.
>
> Do you want me to start writing the forum post for all of this?

I don't agree on the ecol/geology thing but if we use
mechanics/electromagnetcs, we shouldn't have subcatergories, ie physics
because then it could get too confusing for the player.

Civil Engineering/Infrastructure
Sewers, Mail, Power Grids, Water Systems
0%-All Techs-100%
Allows for the building of various public works, and makes them more effective.

Roads
Road, Cobbled Road, Paved Road, Highway
0%-None-20%-Brick/Cement/Stone-100%
Allows goods and people to be moved faster and more efficiently.

OK

> Architecture
> Bridge Building, Tower, Skyscraper
> 0%-Brick/Cement/Stone(*10%)-40%-Metalworking(*20%)-100%
> 0%-Woodworking-100%
> Affects the quality and maximum size of structures built by your civ.
>
> Civil Engineering/Infrastructure
> Sewers, Mail, Power Grids, Water Systems
> 0%-All Techs-100%
> Allows for the building of various public works, and makes them more
> effective.
>
> Roads
> Road, Cobbled Road, Paved Road, Highway
> 0%-None-20%-Brick/Cement/Stone-100%
> Allows goods and people to be moved faster and more efficiently.
>
> I think Architecture should remain seperate. But we could combine Roads
and
> Civil Engineering.

OK

--- New Mail ---

Based on the stuff on the forums, I think that only two more techs are needed for the military side of things:

Tactics
0%-None-100%
Determines the effectiveness of your troops in battle.

Logistics
0%-Industrial Engineering/Management-100%
Controls the ability to supply troops, and the effectiveness of military buildup, movement, and organization.

Anything else is just an application.

> Based on the stuff on the forums, I think that only two more techs are
> needed for the military side of things:
>
> Tactics
> 0%-None-100%
> Determines the effectiveness of your troops in battle.

I think we should use the tactics i had in the orginal model

Land Tactics
Water Tactics
Air Tactics
Mobile Tactics (Tanks and stuff)
Cyber Tactics (Using computers to shut down power gird for the entire
country, FE)

The mobile might not be ness and could be put in with land

> Logistics
> 0%-Industrial Engineering/Management-100%
> Controls the ability to supply troops, and the effectiveness of military
> buildup, movement, and organization.
>
> Anything else is just an application.
>
> By the way, don't forget that until the Boer War, disease killed more
troops
> than battlefield injuries. Your Medicine basic tech should have a large
> impact on the attrition your troops suffer.

Yes i know this.

> Also do u have any ideas for the nonlinear social models yet?
> ---
> I have a preliminary idea that uses basic techs and template techs. It
will
> take a few days to complete.

Land Tactics
Water Tactics
Air Tactics
Mobile Tactics (Tanks and stuff)
Cyber Tactics (Using computers to shut down power gird for the entire
country, FE)

Well that was before u told me u wanted the seperated. As far as them being
similar, the really aren't. Atomic deals with, well atoms and similar
particles. Electromagnetics deals with electricity and magnetism.

> I think we should use the tactics i had in the orginal model
>
> Land Tactics
> Water Tactics
> Air Tactics
> Mobile Tactics (Tanks and stuff)
> Cyber Tactics (Using computers to shut down power gird for the entire
> country, FE)
>
> The mobile might not be ness and could be put in with land
> ---
> I agree that mobile tactics is unnecessary. The same basic strategies are
> good for cavalry or tanks. But if you are going to be this specific you
> will also need a "Combined Arms Tactics" because modern operations
> coordinate all branches of the military. My preference would be only one
> Tactics tech that covers everything here.

The way i had it was that for combined arms it would simply take the
relevant areas and average them out.

> I'm writing up the new version of the tech model now.
> One prob right now. Some specific techs need to be able to be
> researched in more than one way. FE Navigation. Navigation requires
> Astonomy. It also requires a certain percentage in either land or water
> trans, but not both. It can also be helped with electromagnetism, though
> compass is needed.
> ---
> Can I see the model before you post it?

Acutally its not for one reason. Like i said there are 4 forces which
science has devised. 1> Gavity: represented by mechanics 2> Electromagnetic
spectrum, rep by obviously elelctomagnetics 3> Lesser atomic force and 4>
greater atomic force. The last 2 are being worked on to make them one
single one currently. Also for game play only atomic would be ness, but
linking it with electromagnetic would make as much sence then as linking
electromagnetic with mechanics

> The way i had it was that for combined arms it would simply take the
> relevant areas and average them out.
> ---
> A good combined arms force is many times more powerful than the sum of its
> parts. The ability to tactically coordinate many different types of units
> is very important in modern combat. Averaging just will not work. But if
> there was only one tactics tech to begin with, it would already cover all
of
> this with minimum complexity.

Then we would also have to combine mechanics and electromagnetics because
although like u pointed out they do represent completely differnt aspects,
they do have some similarities with each other, just as much as atomic and
electomagnetics do.