Actually, there is a more current list that is based on the infraclasses. I had forgotten about that earlier.

quote: Idea: All infraclasses should be tech tags. Since the technology is designed to reflect what people do, I can fix the tech model so that there is a tech tag for every infraclass this model has. This way, the tech model can generate exactly what the econ model wants. Each infraclass will then have an ideal tech level T and an actual tech level A. The connection helps the tech model as well. Investment in a certain infraclass would generate tagged RP's for that tech tag. These RP's are then distributed among the techs. This should be a relatively painless way to connect RP production to economic activity. So the current list of tech tags would be: Infraclasses: Food (All Agricultural research)* Consumed goods (Standard of Living?) Welfare (Standard of Living?) Education Research (Pure Science) Religion (and Philosophy) Housing Durable Goods (?) Health Care Water & Sewage Power & Heating Communications & Media Transportation Recreation & Luxuries Administration (Government and Politics) Financial Infrastructure (Cash Flow and Economics?) Nature Preservation (Disaster Prevention and Ecological Studies?) Military Infrastructure Military Units Kapital Investment (Production Technologies) *The names in parentheses are the previous names for the tech tags. In some cases I had to extend the infraclass definition a little to get them to match. A question mark means I'm not sure what the infraclass means or I'm not sure if the match is good, so please give feedback on this. Others: Exploration/Movement Diplomacy and Propaganda Prospecting and Extraction

Well I don't want to spend 20 hours going over this, so just a few points:

You said way back when that your system would be easier to modify than a traditional civ2 system. It seems to me that with our scads of parameters that have to be finely tuned it is nothing of the sort. FE your stated proposal to tweak Z values until the system works means that adding even a single new tech can then require a lot of work to rebalance everything. When I add a tech that helps something else, I have to rebalance Z values for all the helpers with that same tag, or the balancing won't be correct (it appears to me). Adding three new techs could become a weekend project. This is just speculation at this point, but please keep it in mind.

Also the Z values IMO should reflect Real Importance of the tag to the tech in question, not essentially arbitrary tweaking to keep the centrifugal tendencies of the system in check so it doesn't explode.

But in truth, its your potentially wasted effort if the system as described doesn't work out, so I'll back off again so I can return to coding. Since my annoying people full-time on design issues is what lead the project to stall for quite a bit in the demo area .

I have tried to make a civ 2 scenario with a custom tech tree. That was harder than anything I have done with this system.

On the other hand, the more parameters, the bigger job in tuning, as Mark has pointed out.

quote: things like transgenetics, learning more about how to better harvest trees on tree farms, etc.

That would be under the Food Activity. Besides, Transgenics would probably be a Tier 2 or 3 tech of its own, with Biology as a helper. This tech would be associated with Production Technologies as well as food and health care.

quote: One possible source of confusion is that "Z values" were also sometimes called "tech tags." The Z value is the number that shows how much the tech is connected to a certain Civilization Activity. A Z value of 10 means that the tech is very important to that activity, so it will recieve a large share of RP's, and will have a big impact on other models that use the data from the Civilization Activity. Z values of 1 or 2 represent a small effect. If the tech does not relate to the Civilization Activity at all, the Z value is zero. The Z value is what is defined in the GUI Tech Builder. The default would be zero, in which case the Civilization Activity is not listed in the editor. The tech tree creator would select from the available list of Civilization Activities and assign a Z value to it. Each tech would typically have 1 to 4 nonzero Z values, meaning that it affects one to four Civilization Activities. A programmer's name for the "Z value" might be "ActivityAffectFactor."

Probably intended to be ActivityEffectFactor, where the "Factor" part doesn't add information. I would use ActivityEffect.

On the other hand, also quoting Richard:

quote: Technology Values (Once Per Tech): m = GrowthRateMultiplier c = UpkeepMultiplier DR = RPDiminishingReturnsMultiplier Ts = StartLevel (Set Helper Technologies) Tn = InitialTechLevel Tn+1 = FinalTechLevel H = TotalHelperEffect And the helper equation is now: RHL = h1*(HT1-Ts1+O1) + . . . + hx*(HTn-Tsn+Ox) (Variables defined below) TotalHelperEffect = MultiplierVariable^(RHL/BaseGlobalHelperEffect

There is no mention of Z values or activity effect factor here. Presumably it should be part of the technology data at read-in.

Is it intended that the Activities be hard-coded or read in? I recommend (as always) the latter.

Activities are, it seems, a list of types. There will need to be objects which actually do something. So one of the other models will create an instance of an activity, assigning RPs for example. Some mechanism will have to be put in place for the technology objects to be aware of these activities. I will think about it.

One of the most important requirements of OO programming is that every object must be created and have an owner, with destruction rights. This needs to be quite specific in the program design. I am not sure how Activities fit within this framework.

Turning now to Applications, shouldn't an Application have a name? Also, how does a particular Application get associated with, say, a unit or a building?

Am I right in assuming that Technologies have Helper techs, but no Required techs, but Applications are the other way round?

What is RTL? It does not seem to be on the extended name list.

It does seem that the only difference (apart from the context in which they are used) between helper and required techs is the existence of an offset in one of them. My inclination is to use a single class for both. Mark would be happy about that - helper techs would once again be stand-alone classes rather than inner classes.

Cheers

quote: Originally posted by Gary There is no mention of Z values or activity effect factor here. Presumably it should be part of the technology data at read-in.[q] D'oh! I had a feeling I was missing something. Yes, they should be there. [q]Is it intended that the Activities be hard-coded or read in? I recommend (as always) the latter.

Yes, read-in. For Demo 5, all activities will be associated with Infraclasses, as defined in the Economy model. As the investment machine spends resources on infraclasses, RP's will be generated and assigned to the corresponding Civilization Activity. Don't worry about how many RP's are generated per resource spent. I can change the BaseGrowthRate (default m) and BaseUpkeep (default c) values as needed.

The Activity methods will then distribute the RP's as follows:

quote: A preliminary idea for distribution or RP’s would be to give each tech a percentage of the total RP spent as follows: For every tech [associated with that Activity], raise 2 to the power of Z/2 and then subtract one. Call this the Y value. Add up all of these values to find the X value. Each tech gets a percentage of the total RP’s spent equal to Y / X.

quote: Activities are, it seems, a list of types. There will need to be objects which actually do something. So one of the other models will create an instance of an activity, assigning RPs for example. Some mechanism will have to be put in place for the technology objects to be aware of these activities. I will think about it. One of the most important requirements of OO programming is that every object must be created and have an owner, with destruction rights. This needs to be quite specific in the program design. I am not sure how Activities fit within this framework.[q] For now, the Economy model could be the other model that creates Activities and "owns" them. We will add other Activities later, but for Demo 5 the list of infraclasses above will do fine. [q]Turning now to Applications, shouldn't an Application have a name? Also, how does a particular Application get associated with, say, a unit or a building?

An application is a unit or building. More specifically, it is the ability to build that thing and it tells how effective that thing will be. It is (correct me if I'm wrong, Mark) a class, and everything the civ produces with that name is an instance of that class. In addition to describing what the things do (their primary purpose), the Application classes will have the functionality that connects their actions to the tech model. Legion and Cathedral are examples of Applications. They become available when the civ reaches a certain level of technology. The Legion's battle power will vary as the levels of the associated techs vary. The cathedral's ability to make people happy will vary as the associated techs vary.

If you play Civ 2, you know that the Monotheism technology allows the construction of the Cathedral application. Then the Theology tech makes the cathedrals more effective, and the Communism tech makes them less effective. The tech model affected Cathedrals, even though "Cathedral" was certainly not a technology. It works the same way here. Applications actually "belong" to other models and not the technology model. The model never gives RP's to a Legion or a Cathedral, and those types of things will not directly affect the rest of the tech model at all. They are simply "by-products" of research.

quote: Am I right in assuming that Technologies have Helper techs, but no Required techs, but Applications are the other way round?

Those are the names, yes, but note that a certain level of a helper technology might be required for a technology to exist, making that technology a requirement as well as a Helper..

quote: What is RTL? It does not seem to be on the extended name list.

RTL is not a programming or game model concept at all. It, like RHL, is simply a way to make the equation look less messy and ugly. Those two things do not exist outside of those equations, and they are only in the equations for readability.

quote: It does seem that the only difference (apart from the context in which they are used) between helper and required techs is the existence of an offset in one of them. My inclination is to use a single class for both. Mark would be happy about that - helper techs would once again be stand-alone classes rather than inner classes.

quote: There is no mention of Z values or activity effect factor here. Presumably it should be part of the technology data at read-in.

quote: D'oh! I had a feeling I was missing something. Yes, they should be there.

It worries me that this system does not shut off technologies. When a civilization is researching interstellar space travel it will still be allocating research point to the development of the bow and arrow.

quote: A preliminary idea for distribution or RP’s would be to give each tech a percentage of the total RP spent as follows: For every tech [associated with that Activity], raise 2 to the power of Z/2 and then subtract one. Call this the Y value. Add up all of these values to find the X value. Each tech gets a percentage of the total RP’s spent equal to Y / X.

This system has problems if the Observer/Observable model is used. When the Observer (the entry in the TechnologySet table) gets a signal, it has no way of knowing how many other technologies are also getting the signal, so it cannot add up the values in this manner. The only way that I can think of to get around this problem is to have an Activity object holding a list of technologies, and the proportion to go to each. Then, when it signals to the Technology object, it can work out the correct percentages.

quote: For now, the Economy model could be the other model that creates Activities and "owns" them. We will add other Activities later, but for Demo 5 the list of infraclasses above will do fine.

I will check the economy model for this aspect.

quote: An application is a unit or building. More specifically, it is the ability to build that thing and it tells how effective that thing will be. It is (correct me if I'm wrong, Mark) a class, and everything the civ produces with that name is an instance of that class. In addition to describing what the things do (their primary purpose), the Application classes will have the functionality that connects their actions to the tech model. Legion and Cathedral are examples of Applications. They become available when the civ reaches a certain level of technology. The Legion's battle power will vary as the levels of the associated techs vary. The cathedral's ability to make people happy will vary as the associated techs vary.

The connection between the actual unit or building, and the tech hierarchy can be achieved in one of two ways:

1. Inheritance. Every "thing" which is an Application inherits from a base Activity class.
2. Containment. Every "thing" which is an Application contains an Activity object, as described above, with the required properties.

The second option is much the better one, since it is more reasonable to have a military unit inherit from another military unit. In addition, this option allows an Application to be influenced by more than one Activity, which can only add power to the game.

It will mean that other coders using the Application system will have to point their instances of objects at the correct Activity.

quote: RTL is not a programming or game model concept at all. It, like RHL, is simply a way to make the equation look less messy and ugly. Those two things do not exist outside of those equations, and they are only in the equations for readability.

I now see that they are working variables. I think I might call them "Esmeralda" and "Clementine" in the code.

quote: It worries me that this system does not shut off technologies. When a civilization is researching interstellar space travel it will still be allocating research point to the development of the bow and arrow.

The current tech tree is designed so that this is not a problem. The Bow is an Application, and the relevant technology would be "Ranged Weapons" among other things. A bow might come at Ranged Weapons level 10 and Woodworking level 15. A plasma rifle might come at Ranged Weapons level 150 and Particle Physics level 140.

But some custom designed tech trees might require temination of some sort. I guess there could be a flag that simply stops advancement at a certain level, holds the level where it is, and cuts the tech out of the RP allocation. But if we are not careful, the players will aim for those points so they don't have to spend the RP on upkeep.

quote: The only way that I can think of to get around this problem is to have an Activity object holding a list of technologies, and the proportion to go to each. Then, when it signals to the Technology object, it can work out the correct percentages.

I assumed that was the plan all along. The Activity objects were meant to distribute the RP's using data they gathered from the other objects.

quote: The connection between the actual unit or building, and the tech hierarchy can be achieved in one of two ways: 1. Inheritance. Every "thing" which is an Application inherits from a base Activity class. 2. Containment. Every "thing" which is an Application contains an Activity object, as described above, with the required properties.[q] I don't understand why there is a direct connection between Activities and Applications. Activities determine how RP's are distributed to Technologies. The Technologies turn those RP's into tech levels. The tech levels then determine application effectiveness. The only direct connection I can think of is that creating an Application using the Economy model will generate RP's that are assigned to an Activity, since each Application is created by devoting resources to an Infraclass. I don't know the proper programming terms very well, so please don't assume that I am telling you how to do something. I'm just trying to explain how we want the model we designed to work. If something I ask for is too difficult too implement, we can certainly make a few changes. [q]The second option is much the better one, since it is more reasonable to have a military unit inherit from another military unit.

I don't understand this one. Does it mean that you want one unit to be a prerequisite for another in the tech tree?

quote: In addition, this option allows an Application to be influenced by more than one Activity, which can only add power to the game.

quote: For every tech [associated with that Activity], raise ...

quote: When the Observer (the entry in the TechnologySet table) gets a signal, it has no way of knowing how many other technologies are also getting the signal...

It seems to me that you thought I was asking you to run the equations in the Technology objects. I didn't mean that. This equation would be run in the Activity object. The equation generates the RP's for each tech, and then passes the RP number to each tech.

And even if I wanted them to be run in Technologies, don't hesitate to ask for model changes if it causes problems like that. The thing I've tested and worked on most is the equations in the spreadsheet, everything else like the way data is passed around can change pretty easily if it causes a problem for programming.

Here is what I meant to say:

The connection between the actual unit or building, and the tech hierarchy can be achieved in one of two ways:

1. Inheritance. Every "thing" which is an Application inherits from a base Application class which contains the requirements, etc.
2. Containment. Every "thing" which is an Application contains an ApplicationSpecification object, as with the required properties.

The second option is much the better one, since it is more reasonable to have a military unit inherit from another military unit. In addition, this option allows a number of Applications to have the same relationship to the tech structure, by using the same ApplicationSpecification object.

It will mean that other coders using the Application system will have to point their instances of objects at the correct ApplicationSpecification, which must be created by them, and registered with the tech structure as observable.

I hope this makes more sense.

Cheers

My post crossed your further comment!

What time of day is it where you are? It is 3pm Wednesday her.

The TechnologySet is specific to whatever entity has technologies. It may be a civilization, or a province or (heaven forbid) a map square. There is nothing in the technology coding that prevents any combination to be used.
The TechnologySet has a level value for each technology, for the particular entity (civilization, etc), and a link to the relevant Technology.

The Technologies themselves are unchanging, and the same for all civilizations.

The TechnologySet is required, because the calculation of tech rises has to be able to access the helper tech levels.

The TechnologySet will probably have its name changed to TechnologyLevels.

It is actually a hash map, with:

Technology object as the key
Level and NewLevel as data (float)

The process is:

1. Work through the TechnologySet, tech by tech
2. Pick up the Level for the tech
3. Look up the Technology object and get the help list, and the parameters
4. Look up each of the helpers in the TechnologySet and get the levels
5. Perform the calculations
6. Store the result in NewLevel

Then, when all have been calculated,
7. Work through the TechnologySet, tech by tech
8. Set the Level to NewLevel

Cheers

quote: Originally posted by Gary Thomas on 03-27-2001 09:57 PM What time of day is it where you are? It is 3pm Wednesday her.

Ah yes, the wonders of global connectivity. I am relaxing after classes while you are posting from work tomorrow.

By the way, here's how you can deal with unexpected boss visits:
1) Find some arcane portion of your company's webpage, or an industry webpage.
2) Copy that html file to your hard drive.
3) Put a bookmark to the hard drive file in the Favorites folder.
4) Memorize the keyboard shortcuts to that page from the Favorites folder.

You can type the shortcut really fact, and it will load up almost instantly. In less than a second, you can go from posting at Apolyton to stydying Section II-A-3 of your company's Programming Standards Manual. Then you can simply click "Back" and everything will be as it was.

The TechnologySet/TechnologyLevels sounds good. There has been talk of giving one of these to every ethnic group, so we can experiment with that.

quote: The process is: 1. Work through the TechnologySet, tech by tech 2. Pick up the Level for the tech 3. Look up the Technology object and get the help list, and the parameters 4. Look up each of the helpers in the TechnologySet and get the levels 5. Perform the calculations 6. Store the result in NewLevel

Sounds good for now. In future versions we will have equations for tech diffusion due to trade, conquest, and migration. That would happen between stwp 5 and 6.

Agree strongly with both of you that Everything possible should be read in from ini files and tunable (at their potential peril ) by playtesters.

quote: For Demo 5, all activities will be associated with Infraclasses, as defined in the Economy model.

Um, for demo 5 there is no tech model... won't even likely be hooked into the game for now, although we could maybe demo some things. What you say is true for demo 6, with the inclusion of military unit effectiveness to the economy you mentioned. At least that is my take on how the staging of such things should work. However with F_Smith's real life attack, and me taking over the stuff he was doing for d5 its possible things will go slowly for me, and tech will be much further along than I anticipate.

quote: The TechnologySet/TechnologyLevels sounds good. There has been talk of giving one of these to every ethnic group, so we can experiment with that.

Although that may be the preferred long-term solution, perhaps for simplicity in the first tests we should just hook up TechLevels to Civilization. Lord knows the playtesting for the model, and interpreting what's happening and why, is going to be tough enough with tech even at the civ level. So that's my vote anyway. We could have a TechUser interface and Civ would be the first thing that implements it.

quote: Out of curiosity, are you the same Gary Thomas who posts in the Warlords Battlecry forums?

As a result of the extended discussions about tech details, I have sort of accidentally almost finished coding the whole tech model.

The main thing I have to do now is finish the user interface for the editor, and get it debugged.

From Mark:

quote: We could have a TechUser interface and Civ would be the first thing that implements it.

I am having conceptual difficulties with using the Observer/Observable system to communicate with tech. For example, when building applications, presumably a player will be presented with a list of buildable applications for a civilization (or whatever). When the list is constructed, for each possible application the code will need to check whether the application is buildable. My TechnologicalInterface has a call:

code:

---

public boolean isBuildable(String name)

---

Cheers

The tech part itself is done all but the RP expressions and the interface with other parts of the game. The expressions have been delayed because it takes a little while to change the algebraic variables in Mark's code to the descriptive ones. The helper stuff algebra is all done, for RPs and for applications.

I have to figure out exactly how activities are coded, and how the rest of the system interacts with tech.

The "isBuildable" for applications is done.

Most of the GUI is done and tested: I have to add helper panels for techs and apps, and the parameters for apps.

I have to add activities to the GUI (pretty simple!).

The read/write to XML is done (though I haven't reworked Xerces yet) but needs to be tested.

I go home tomorrow morning.

This time I will not forget to take the source code.

Should be complete and usable by Sunday or Monday.

quote: I have to figure out exactly how activities are coded, and how the rest of the system interacts with tech.

Done

quote: I have to add helper panels for techs and apps, and the parameters for apps.

Done

quote: I have to add activities to the GUI (pretty simple!).

Done

One thing I have to do is add "Remove" buttons to all the options. Not a big job.

Excellent Progress , though I'm sorry to hear about the not being able to sleep thing...

quote: I have to figure out exactly how activities are coded, and how the rest of the system interacts with tech. Done

quote: Can you fill us in on how you plan to have it work exactly? That's because there may be things going on in other models you're not aware of, and so its possible your approach will be incomplete etc. I don't anticipate that, but better safe than sorry...

Depending on the response I can do it in various ways.

However, the Observer/Observable option does not seem to be very appropriate. I have to go now, but will post something when I get home in a few hours.

The I and E parameters seem to be floating around - I don't know what to do with them. In passing, the symbol E is used for at least three different things in the model.

The final provisional draft definitive idea for the technology interface is:

code:

---

/**
 * Title:        TechnologyActivity
 * Description:  Technology specific aspects of activities
 * Copyright     2001, the Clash of Civilizations Development Group
 *
 * @author       Gary Thomas and Mark Everson
 * @version      0.1, Date: March 27, 2001
 */
/**
 * The general interface for all connections to the technology model.
 * 

 * The calls are grouped according to their context.
 * 

 * Definition:
 * owner or Technology owner:
 * any entity (civilization, province, map square, city, scientific genius
 * character - the Einstein effect) that has a technology level profile.
 * The system keeps a list of owners, and they can interact.
 * 

 * In addition to this interface there are three static calls:
 * 

 * Create a new Technology object for a new technology owner
 * TechnologyInterface Technology.newInstance(String owner)
 * 

 * Find a Technology object for a technology owner
 * TechnologyInterface Technology.getInstance(String owner)
 * 

 * Update the technology levels for all owners
 * void Technology.update()
 */
public interface TechnologyInterface {
  //---------------------- Affecting the interface itself -------------------
  /**
   * Remove this technology.
   * 

   * This does not destroy the interface object, it just removes the owner
   * from the owner's list. To get rid of the object, set it o null.
   */
  public void remove();
  //---------------------------- Other Technology ---------------------------
  /**
   * Clone this technology (the owner has split into two parts).
   * 

   * The new interface will be a copy of the old one, with all the same
   * levels
   * @param newOwner the owner's name for the new interface
   */
  public TechnologyInterface copy(String newOwner);
  /**
   * Merge this technology (two owners have merged)
   * 

   * Note that this does not remove the (now) redundant owner.
   * @param merging the name of the other owner
   */
  public void merge(String merging);
  //-------------------------- Technology levels ----------------------------
  /**
   * Get the level of a particular technology for this civilization
   * 

   * @param name name of the technology
   * @return the technology level for this technology
   */
  public float getLevel(String name);
  /**
   * Set the level of a particular technology for this civilization
   * 

   * @param name name of the technology
   * @param level the technology level to be set
   */
  public void setLevel(String name, float level);
  //----------------------------- Applications ------------------------------
  /**
   * Application, method to determine whether an application is buildable
   * 

   * @param name name of the application
   * @return true if the application can be built
   */
  public boolean isBuildable(String name);
  /**
   * Application, get the effect of an application from its name
   * @param name name of the application
   * @return the effect of technology on the application
   */
  public float getEffect(String name);
  //-------------------------- Research effects ----------------------------
  /**
   * Set the research effect related to an activity
   * 

   * @param activityData the activity data
   */
  public void addToResearch(String name, float value);
  //--------------------------- Diffusion -----------------------------------
  /**
   * Set diffusion from neighbour
   * @param neighbour name of neighbour
   * @param effect the effect (0.0 - 1.0) of the diffusion
   */
  public void setDiffusionFrom(String neighbour, float effect);
  /**
   * Set diffusion from neighbour
   * @param neighbour TechnologyInterface of neighbour
   * @param effect the effect (0.0 - 1.0) of the diffusion
   */
  public void setDiffusionFrom(TechnologyInterface neighbour, float effect);
}

---

To use this:

1. For each technology owner, get an interface:
TechnologyInterface parisTech = Technology.newInstance("Paris");
If you need to find an existing interface, use:
TechnologyInterface londonTech = Technology.getInstance("London")

2. To get rid of an interface (when London burns, for example), use
londonInterface.remove();

3. If Paris splits into two different communes with the same tech levels, use
TechnologyInterface newParisTech = parisTech.copy("New Paris");

4. Then, when they reunite:
parisTech.merge("New Paris");
newParisTech.remove();

5. To get the tech level for a particular technology, use
float londonBottlers = londonTech.getLevel("Bottle washing theory");

6. To set the tech level for a particular technology, use
londonTech.setLevel("Bottle washing theory", 87.43);

7. For applications, to see if London can build an automatic washing machine, use
londonTech.isBuildable("Automatic washing machine");

8. To get the effectiveness of said application, use
float washerbility = londonTech.getEffect("Automatic washing machine");

9. To add some research to an activity, use
addToResearch("Cleanliness", 32.2);

10. To update all the technology levels in the game at the end of a turn, use
Technology.update()

I have also added a couple of diffusion knoledge methods which I will discuss later:
public void setDiffusionFrom(String neighbour, float effect);
public void setDiffusionFrom(TechnologyInterface neighbour, float effect);

That's enough for one post.

A quote from Richard:

quote: A preliminary idea for distribution or RP’s would be to give each tech a percentage of the total RP spent as follows: For every tech [associated with that Activity], raise 2 to the power of Z/2 and then subtract one. Call this the Y value. Add up all of these values to find the X value. Each tech gets a percentage of the total RP’s spent equal to Y / X.

This is a strange transormation: 2^Z/2

Would it not be better to just store the proportions? Easier to code, and more importantly, easier to understand.

Cheers

What were the other two uses of E?

Yes, we can certainly eliminate the 2^Z/2. As I said, that was simply a rough draft of an idea. The ActivityEffect can simply be stored as a number. These numbers would typically be between 1 and 64. The RP distribution would then be based on a proportion. Example:

A CivilizationActivity, Infrastructure, has the following techs with ActivityEffect numbers (Tier 3 techs omitted for brevity):

Architecture, 50
Civil Engineering, 60
Construction, 30
Roads, 35
Masonry and Cement, 20
Mapping and Surveying, 20
Mechanical Engineering, 10

Architecture would then get 50/225, or 22.2%, of the RP's generated by investment in the Infrastructure infraclass.

Hmm, would it be easier to have the techs store a percentage? So Architecture would be assigned 20% Infrastructure. The designer would then have to make sure that the percentages added up to 100%, but it might be a more intuitive way to assign the values.

At a glance, your plan looks good, but I haven't taken time to go over it well.

There is a very useful O'Reilly book: HTML Pocket Reference. This has everything you need, it is small and cheap.

Here is a random sample of some other stuff from one of my JavaDoc comments in another project:

"The model is:

For brevity these are represented by:

Let

I hope it comes out right!

For the percentage weightings, the editor program will take any numbers and scale them before saving. If you then edit the Activity you will get the scaled values which can then be adjusted.

"Bottle washing theory" - LOL

One thing you need:

quote: One thing you need: addToResearch(String name, float value) needs to also support adding RPs directly to a tech, a opposed to an activity. That is for the case where Roosevelt says, Here's $2B (1942 dollars), go find out how to build an atomic bomb. Or the modern US govt says use $X for basic Physics research. If you can already do this, then its just the doc that needs to be updated.

One way of achieving this is to create the appropriate Activity for each such transfer, with a single technology as the recipient. Doing it this way has the advantage of using a single mechanism.

After all, spending on basic research (such as bottlewashing) is an activity. Also, in spite of the goverment's efforts there might be some spill-over into another type of research, which the activity system can reflect.

On the other hand, if the idea is that any technology can have research applied, then the program could be easily modified to allow a technology name as well as an activity name.

then H = 2^{S_ih_i (y_it + d_i - y_t)/W}

Let V₁ = rm - c M^{(y_t - s)/G}

If V₁ < 0 then let V₂ = V₁

otherwise let V_M = HV₁^R

                     G log(M^{(y_t - s)/G} + V₂)
Now    y_t+1 = ---------------------- + s
                            log M

Is this right?

Sorry about the funny font sizes!

Cheers

quote: H = 2Sihi (yit + di - yt)/W

Should be:

H = M^{S_ih_i (y_it + d_i - y_t)/W}

quote: Let V1 = rm - c M(yt - s)/G If V1 < 0 then let V2 = V1 otherwise let VM = HV1R

Should simply be:

V_M = r^RmH - c M^{(y_t - s)/G}

You were using an outdated plan. Sorry.

quote: The formulae do not seem to be all that stable and have not been summarized recently.

My test of the system will be to plug exactly the same numbers into the spreadsheet and the Java code. The results will hopefully be the same.

quote: You can get the tech spreadsheets at My website or the Clash website in the tech section.

The code, as far as the model goes, is now complete and I am working on the test harness.

There are, however, gaps in the model, or perhaps in my understanding of it.

There are various mentions of "when the technology is first discovered" or "the starting level for the technology". There is nothing in the equations to indicate how this works. From an earlier comment that general technologies ("missile weapons") cover the whole gamut from throwing a rock to throwing an ICBM, I rather thought that all technology owners start with all technologies, at however primitive a level. Is this so?

If not, what is the triggering mechanism?

In the main Clash menu, the description of the tech model starts with a differential equation. I suspect the equation is wrong - it bears a close resemblance to a generalized logistic (and the text suggests that a logistic is intended), but for a logistic, the "RP" (x) term should be "tech level" (y). I haven't checked whether the equations reflect the solution of the differential equation. There is, presumably, some theoretical basis for the equation, otherwise why include a strange term like 1/(log 2) or 1/(log M)?

quote: For Helper Techs (Once for each of a technology's helper techs): ... Tr = TechRequirement

When all of the helper techs have reached Tr, the technology comes into existence at a level of Ts.

I am about halfway through the unit testing of the code. Should be available by Easter, complete, documented, and working.

At that point I would like to clarify all the issues relating to the model. There are quite a few parameters whose use seems a bit dubious, or at least unclear to me. I would like to be able to include in the JavaDoc system an exact specification of what the code does.

Just as an example, what possible reason is there for any technology to start at a value other than zero?

The editor will allow editing of TechnologyData, ApplicationData and ActivityData. In this context all of these relate to their impact on technology only. It will be quite simple to add other aspects of these objects, or to add other objects such as EthnicGroupData, MajorReligionData, or whatever.

Cheers

quote: The tech system is defined so that a tech level of 100 represents the highest publicly known implementation of a certain technology as of January 1, 2000. Yes, it's quite arbitrary, but we needed a concrete baseline. This definition, combined with the rule that 10 levels equals double the knowledge or skill, means that the technology will often have to start at a fairly high level.

I am afraid that I do not think that this is a very good idea. A new technology (nanotechnology, for example) which is embryonic at 2000 would still get a 100 rating. By the year 2100 it will be something like level 20000. My personal preference would be to define a "mature level" for a technology, and set that to 100, regardless of the year at which it was achieved.

I am uncertain in other areas. Assuming that "the internal combustion engine" would not be an application, but rather an applied technology (it is certainly not a unit), the history of the internal combustion engine, under this system, effectively, has gone from something like 90 to 100 in a hundred years.

In fact most specific technologies of this kind do not improve very greatly. There are, of course some exceptions - electronics and its spin-offs are obvious examples.

Since the "doubling" is utterly subjective, it is actually just adding another parameter without, as far as I can see, any practical contribution to the game's playability or realism. The growth rate factor already adjusts for scale.

quote: Since the "doubling" is utterly subjective, it is actually just adding another parameter without, as far as I can see, any practical contribution to the game's playability or realism. The growth rate factor already adjusts for scale.

I don't understand. The doubling is not subjective at all. It is central to the operation of the whole system. The effect on applications and as helper techs depends on the scaling rule where 10 levels is double the ability.

quote: A new technology (nanotechnology, for example) which is embryonic at 2000 would still get a 100 rating. By the year 2100 it will be something like level 20000

Remember that the tech level is a logarithmic scale. 110 is twice as good as 100. Sending the tech to a level of 200 means that its effectiveness has been multiplied by 2¹⁰, or 1024. That is an enormous change in power and usefulness.

The internal combustion engine has become quite a lot more effective. Compare the difference between a model T and the best modern car available. The speed, range, efficiency, and load carrying capacity have been multiplied by at least eight, putting that tech at a start of about 70.

Besides, I don't see anything wrong with starting a tech at level 90. If skill only doubles in the time period, that seems a reasonable thing to do.

I have tried to make a system that would make it easy to create an accurate tech tree. By referencing the modern world instead of some arbitrary value, I can know exactly what a tech level means. I know instantly that "60" means 1/16th as good as what we have today. There is no question about what the number represents.

Since I will probably be the one entering all the numbers, this is very important. If I have to invent some arbitrary ideal level for every tech, then it will take me a lot longer and be very hard to debug. How does anyone else know what I mean by the 'mature level' for genetic engineering? How can I describe that to the person who makes a military unit? If there isn't any good, clear standard, then nobody will know what a tech level means.