Welcome to the Technology 2.0 Thread. Here we formulate ideas to improve the way technology works in CivX. In fact, quite a few ideas have been made already. So, please check The Technology Summary for the list of ideas, past and present, on this topic if you aren’t already familiar with them.

Be warned that there is also a thread at Apolyon. While I’d prefer for everyone to post here, I’ll try and bring ideas made there over here as well.

The summary has been altered a good bit, since Brian wants "specific applications" of ideas. Unfortunately this has made it quite a bit bigger, though the "Actual Techs Suggested" section STILL needs fleshing out. So, there's a lot of new stuff- it's like Corn Flakes, it's the same as before at heart, but you should taste them again, for the first time. By the ancient technology "S Tih May Shun," the summary is 31.2% longer and (43+(e-2))% better, which is roughly 43.71828%, by the way. I've also redone the numbering system to be like it is on the HTML version of the list. Still, I may not have changed all the references to idea #x- if you catch any errors like that, or any spelling errors, be sure to post my mistake for all to see. After all, better you telling me than Brian, eh?

And as a reminder, I will not try to squash or destroy your idea; but I will try and summarize them fairly and impartially here in the summary and in the final letter to Brian.

The Summary, linked above, is divided into several parts, including-

Section I: The Research Process (How do I do research into technology?)
Section II: The Tech Tree (How do I get specific techs?)
Section III: The Techs Themselves...
Section IV: Issues of Technology Cost.
Section V: Science and its relationship with Infrastructure and Society.
Section VI: Game Options set at the Beginning of the Game:
Section VII:Things NOT to do:
Section VIII: Actual Techs Suggested

Needless to say, Section VIII is largest. However, Section I is so important that I’m going to reprint it here in it’s entirety (it’s not THAT big); still, it doesn’t mean you shouldn’t read the summary. Furthermore, it should give you an idea of the style of the summary.

Section I: The Research Process (How do I do research into technology?)

1.1) MULTIPLE TOPIC RESEARCH -- Many of the following ideas require that you be able to research several ideas at once. There must be some advantage to researching things in parallel rather than serially, or else no one will do it.

Specific Application: See ideas 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 2.1, 2.6, and others.

1.2) TECHNOLOGICAL FIELDS -- Many of the following ideas require that the techs be placed into a small number of broad categories. Effort should probably be made to make the different fields roughly equal in terms of number and usefulness of techs (trying to put the old tech tree into these categories give Math&Physics a big advantage...)

SA: So far, the suggestions have been: Philosophy, Agriculture & Biology, Economics, Math & Physics, and Psychology/Theology. You would research 5 technologies at a time, one in each field. On the other hand, another system of 4-5 fields (or even 2 fields- "soft" science, philosophy, economics, & psychology, and "hard" science, math, physics, & biology) would surely work as well. We recommend against there being a "military" field; it would be too easy for someone to pour all their resources into it and unbalance the early game. See idea 1.4.

1.3) DEVELOPMENT INERTIA -- It doesn't make sense that the same researchers who just gave you "Nuclear Fission" would be able to turn around and give you "Television, because they are only peripherally related. Scientists are specialized, and can't easily be pushed around to different fields. You should have multiple "teams", each of which is working on a different project. When they are done with one, they will research a second project in the same field at a faster rate than an unrelated field (or pay a higher cost to research an "outside our expertise" field -- the effect is the same). See 1.15 for a similar idea.

SA: You have 2 teams of researchers. One has just completed finishing a Math & Physics tech. If you tell it to research economics, it will take longer than another Math & Physics tech. This would be another way to simulate inertia and not wanting to change your priorities. The penalty would be less in early times (see idea 9), and perhaps you would receive another team of researchers in the modern age.

1.4) RESEARCH PRIORITY SLIDER BARS WITH 'INERTIA' -- There should be several fields of research (see item 2) and you can set different allocations for the different fields (e.g. 25% of research points to Philosophy, 25% to Ag, 50% to Econ.) representing the number of scientists in that field and the money/work poured into it. However, whenever you change the allocation, you take a hit to the "efficiency" at which you research the topic you changed(i.e. number of research points per turn decreases), which is proportional to the magnitude of the change. This "efficiency hit" gradually diminishes over time until your society reaches "scientific equilibrium" at the new settings. This effect is likely to result in a "character" for different civs, because some will emphasize one field over another depending on their AI, and be unlikely to change because of the cost.

SA: Since the University of Planet shifted to such a strong emphasis on math & physics, they get those techs very fast since 40%of the scientists work on it, but their psychology research is in bad shape due to lack of funding and scientists. It would take a long while to get their psych research back on their feet, even if they increased their percentage allotment.

1.5) TECHNOLOGICAL "FIELDS" CONTAINING MINOR TECHS- 15-20 general fields of science are created to look into, like "Medicine," Agriculture," "Industrialization," and "Metallurgy," each containing many, many minor techs. You can choose which field (or fields, under option 1) you want to research (And, under ideas 2 &4, perhaps you research 3 fields at once each in different categories with different amounts of work on each), and you get minor techs from that field until you switch. This allows a far, far greater amount of minor techs (in Medicine alone, you might have "Anatomy," "Germ Theory," "Antiseptics," "Circulation of Blood..." It also allows you to have some direction to your research, but have some element of randomness still exist (see OFFSHOOT TECHS idea for a similar idea).

SA: I tell my scientists to research Industrialization, Agriculture, and Medicine. I periodically receive notices that I've discovered "Spinning Jenny," "Mass Production," the "Labor Union," "Diesel Trains," etc. in Industrialization, until I decide to switch that topic (or get told there are no more minor techs left there to research) to, say, Physics, where I start discovering "Radioactivity," "Relativity," and so on. Not all of these minor techs would have immediate benefits.

1.6) "GATEWAY" TECHS- If you have an era system (Antiquity, Renaissance, Industrial, Modern?), there should be a "gateway" tech for each new era that allows it to truly flourish. If you haven't researched that tech, then all other techs of the same era cost double the amount (or some other penalty).

SA: I can research The Corporation before Railroads, but very expensive (if Railroads is the gateway tech to the Industrial era).

1.7) AI TECH TRADING INTELLIGENCE -- Make sure that the AIs only make tech trades that make sense. Why trade for "Mass Transit" if you don't have "Automobile"?

SA: Limit players from getting techs they lack the prerequisites for.

1.8) STARTING POSITION DEPENDENT CIV SPECIALTIES -- When a civ is placed on the map, give it a tech specialty. This solves the problem of saying "the Phoenicians should get a seafaring bonus because they had a maritime empire" by instead giving a civ that starts close to water a maritime bonus (and if that happened to be the Phoenicians, then you could play the Phoenicians like the existed historically, although hopefully they'd last longer ). A tech specialty would be a small bonus to research in related fields (or simply a higher beginning allocation to a certain field, if the RESEARCH PRIORITY SLIDER BARS WITH 'INERTIA' system is used). The bonus should disappear in modern times. (not necessary with SLIDER BAR system)

SA: The Babylonians start out with their technology slider bars higher for agriculture and philosophy, with no adjustment penalty of course. The English have a focus in Math & Physics as well as Economics. The Greeks have a large philosophy starting out point, maybe 35%. And so on.

Or, my civ's capital is a seaport, therefore all boats built by my civ cost 5 resources less for the early game. Or perhaps my civ started near two terrain squares with horses grazing. All horsemen and cavalry I make start one level of experience higher than normal. Etc.

Also, you give the user the option to decide which type of place to start in, so that he or she can determine character of civ if he wants. For instance, you can choose "Inland Plains," "Seacoast," "Island," etc.

1.9) HISTORICAL ERA SHOULD PLAY A ROLE -- Since in ancient times scholars studied a wide variety of fields (they were real Renaissance men) it makes sense to have tech specialization only play a role in more modern types of research (e.g. an ancient Greek philosopher might have contemplated both the role and practice of government as well as the laws of motion).

SA: Switching your slider bars incurs less of an efficiency penalty and a faster adaptation and equilibrium to the new settings in very early times.

1.10) FAMOUS SCIENTISTS - Scientific personalities, such as Einstein or Pasteur might provide some "flavor" to the scientific experience. Perhaps these are random events that give you one time bonuses?

SA: You get a message that "Pasteur has established a laboratory in Paris, science output doubles in Paris for next 12 turns in Paris" or "Edison sets up shop in Menlo Park, income and science increased by 20% for next 25 turns there," or even disasters like "Lysenko becomes research head of Agriculture & Biology, research only 20% effective throughout empire for next 25 turns." The names of the scientists could be randomized, or specific to each culture.

For that matter, this doesn't just have to be with scientists. The "Famous person" motif can be done with any group ("Florence Nightingale follows army, losses reduced 10% for duration of war").

And the number of turns doesn't have to be pre-set, either; rather, an optimum number of turns can be set, and a bell curve of randomized numbers falls around that number so you know that Pastuer will probably die/retire within 12 turns, but it might be 10, it might be 15, etc.

1.11) FAMOUS SCIENTISTS AS CHARACTERS - Some have suggested scientist "units" given as a bonus that can sit in a city and give extra research, but are prone to assassination or defection and only last so many turns. Some oppose this idea.

SA: Germany gets an Einstein unit, who increases technology output in Berlin until he leaves and defects to the USA when the government changes to Fascist, and he sits in a USA city of the US's choice and increases the science output there instead.

1.12) SERENDIPITOUS ADVANCES -- Technology discovered "accidentally". Basically a random event that gives you a tech advance.

SA: "Alexander Fleming uses poor lab technique, accidentally discovers penicillin." This would avert he goody-hut saving & reloading problem as well.

1.13) TECHS SHOULD BE HARDER TO RESEARCH -- It is unrealistic for a civ to have the ability to realistically research every tech in the game without help -- historically nobody has developed everything. Techs should have a higher cost relative to the number of research points that are expected to be produced by an empire than in previous games. Another poster says this feature takes away the option if isolationism. An alternative to this would be to dramatically ramp up the cost of the futuristic techs in the endgame, so you may only get 2 or 3 of them.

SA: With the future techs ridiculously expensive variant, your thoughts might be like this:

"Should I get eugenics or arcologies? Nanotechnology or Neurohacking? I can only research at most two before either the Unity launches or the Apocalypse happens (see idea XXX)"

1.14) BUDGET SCIENCE FROM TAX BUDGET- instead of the classic tax/science/luxuries system, count the science rate as taxes spent on science. Thus higher scientific spending has the same effect as high taxes- greater unhappiness, greater unemployment (if you're a Republican, at least).

SA: This is actually sort of in the current game engine, if you spend more on science, by definition you spend less on luxuries. But if the system is changed to a tax rate model where you set the tax rate through your empire, this could be important.

1.15) "PROBLEM BASED" TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH- you tell your science advisors what problems or needs your society has, like more food or better defense in battle, and they research something along those lines, perhaps getting you granaries or advanced irrigation or shields. Combined with redundant techs, this is another way different civs can have comparable units but wildly different technologies and philosophies (since the two civs found different ways of increasing defense in battle, say).

SA: Both the Federation and the Romulans are equally matched, but they have quite different styles and technology. Similarly, one civ might extensively use longbows, like the English, while the French would prefer primitive firearms.

This is rather similar to number 2, actually, and instead of choosing standard categories, you would choose "Find me a better weapon" or "Find me something to make my cities happier" as categories of research.

1.16) TRICKLE-DOWN LIST OF RESEARCH- You have a list of technologies, ordered based on as soon as a certain tech was made available to you. 10-60% of your research points goes to the first topic, 10-30% goes to your second topic, 5-20% goes to your third topic on the list, etc. The degree of specificity depends on things like how many libraries and universities you have. When you discover a tech, new techs you can now research go to the bottom of the queue and wait to be moved up. You can pay a certain efficiency cost to take techs closer to the bottom and move them farther up on the list.

SA: I just discovered Code of Laws, which makes Monarchy possible, but all the other level-2 and level-1 technologies that I could have researched before are above it. So I pay slight efficiency costs to move Monarchy higher up the list where it will get more research points.

So, parts of the summary are horribly wrong and need correcting? Or the best darn idea that no one’s thought of isn’t on it? Great! Post now and tell us what your idea is to make this list better, which is of course our only goal here.

And I can’t emphasize enough how important it is to read The Summary.

-------------
SnowFire, Technology Thread-Manager.

The thread summaries should go on the Wish List Forum only, not here in the Suggestions forum. You can just link people to your summary and give a general introduction here. This way people will feel a little more inclined to view this thread as a 'work-in-progress.' (It's a great summary by the way.)

------------------
Live your own life, for you will die your own death. -Latin Proverb

By the way, your addition is in the summary now. Thanks for putting it in easy-to-summarize form.

yin: Okay, will do.

Spartan: Your idea is being put in as we speak. Er, type.

Elite Conscription
How is this unrealistic? Please define.

Antimatter Containment
Realistic. Just power intensive, because while we've had antimatter since the '20s and the trap containers since about the '30s, we haven't been able to store a lot because of power usage...but as future techs roll in, and more power becomes availible...

Lasers, and Cloning
We have both techs now. Not too futuristic. I would classify Lasers as a modern tech, and Cloning as one of the last of those.

Xenopsychology
I'd move that to unrealistic, since we would probably find it exceedingly difficult to communicate with aliens (if we met them), and communication would be necessary to learn how they act.

Anti-gravity
Snow, old pal, you've got it on there twice.

Q- thanks, on anti-grav and ion engines. However-

Elite Conscription
How is this unrealistic? Please define.

By definition. Literally. Conscription means taking people out of the populace. Conscripted people are not going to be anywhere near elite in the future- as technology advances, people require more and more training to be good military men, not less. Before, everyone knew how to use a bow if they wanted to eat, so this could be plausible. But no one knows how to drive an M1A2 Abrams 2 days after being drafted.

Pit: Check out the "Researching Further into Topics" suggestion. If I understand you correctly, they're basically the same thing. In that idea, obviously you always research something different, you can research the next technology to get the next best thing, or you can continue research into a field you've alreayd discovered to get bonuses to units in that field. For instance, I do extra research into my "archery" tech and get crossbows, which equare to +2/+0 to all my archers, while someone else may have simply gone right for muskets, which would take longer, but eventually prove more effective.

Excellent work on your summary. Well layed out, easy to read.

Just a tech idea:

Economic: Tourism. Increases trade, possibly with extra bonuses from some city enhancements or special terrain ("Come and see the wondrous Borehole Cluster")

Aredhran

My meager contributions are the following (which may be in the summary, I didn't read it all):
1. Scientists work better without a lot of governmental management. Therefore, your rate of discovery should depend on how much conrtol you exert over the process. Turning it over to the white coats should lead to your nation's fastest work, specific diretives the slowest, and there could be one or two levels ni between.

Aredhran: Check under economics techs, it's there.

you would have a certain number of techs (lets say 5) that would enable industrial age applications of the tech you have and will discover.

so electricty is an idea tech in the industrial age, it is a prerequist for semiconductors and it has two indutrial age application, and one modern age application associated with it. the first industrial age application is light bulbs...this gives you a new kind of worker (like a technicain turning into an engineer in SMAC) you need the industrial age enabler tech invention for it to work. the other industrial age application is the telegraph. this increases trade among all of your cities you need the industrial age enabler tech transportation for it to work. in the modern era electricty has the modern age application electric power. this increases the amount of resources all of your workers produce when there is an electric power plant in the city. this requires the modern era enabler tech corporation for it to work.

note i'm not refering to civ2 techs i'm just giving an example. maybe instead of researching application techs as long as you have the enabler tech then the application works. so if you were a renessance era civ and you stole electricity unless you had the enabler techs invention, transportation, and corporation electricty wouldn't do anything for you. and maybe the enabler techs aren't researched but they are triggered. like if you have a certain amount of techs and the right circumstances then you get the enabler techs. so calling them techs is a little misleading.

so here's how it works you resarch idea techs normally, they have a tech tree and each idea tech has certain application tied to it. the application doesn't work unless you posses the enabler for each era. the enabler is like a tech but instead of being researched it is triggered by a certain set of events.

advantages...even if a backward civ stole some advanced ideas from your civ they wouldn't be able to translate these idea into weapons or whatever. and with the enablers being triggered it's add a bit of strategy trying to set up the right circumstances for the industrial revolution to happen, then just rbitraily discovering a tech that starts it. i think it'd be more fun this way.

Research points are generated as before, but are used differently. Add up all research points as cities are updated each turn. There should be a list of all available techs (those whose prerequisites have been researched). This list should be ordered, either by sophistication (such as the way techs are numbered in SMAC), or by the order they were made available (I prefer the second). A random percentage of the total available research points is assigned to the first tech on the list, a random percentage of what is left is assigned to the second tech on the list and so on. The percentage would fall in a range determined by the best science facility a civ had (say 0-50% for none, 10-60% for a library somewhere, up to 50-100% for SETI or similar late game facility. After this calculation, the game will check the list top to bottom for techs with more accumulated points than the current requirement (It seems to me that previous SMAC games place this requirement as a function of total known techs. Alternatively, we could follow the MoO model where each tech has a specific cost.). Any points unassigned (this would tend to be small most of the time) and surplus for any tech would be held over for the next turn, possibly depleted somewhat (following my above example, if you only had libraries, only 60% of the surplus would be held over).

Of course, we all want to be able to direct research, so I thought of a way to do that. By clicking on a tech on the research list, it would be traded with the tech listed directly above it. Doing so applies a -1 penalty (listed next to the tech name) to the tech you clicked on. If the tech originally above had a higher penalty, then the higher penalty is decreased (made less bad) by -1 when the switch is made (This, I think, is the correction which makes all choices resulting in a given order equivalent.) Before assigning research points for a tech with a penalty, a percentage are outright lost (penalty times 5% for libraries only, times 1% for SETI). These penalties could be offset by gold at an appropriate ratio (I recall having a lot more bulbs than gold a turn, so 1-1 may not be helpful enough) up to a set percentage of the national surplus (which is known because this calculation takes place at the end of the city upkeep phase).

I think these ideas cover some of our desire to see free research rewarded, while allowing governmental tinkering when necessary. If one objects to the randomness, I think it would be just as reasonable to fix the percentage at the middle of the ranges I've suggested.

I had split future tech into two bits. One is plausible future tech based on the current state of science, and the other was future tech inspired by specific works of fiction or SF sources.

My list of fictional future techs was merely for reference, to inspire ideas. ICE, for example, is an invention of William Gibson, used originally in Neuromancer (it stands for Intrusion Countermeasures Electronics and has become a standby of the cyberpunk genre). Liquid metal/mimetic polyalloy is a reference to Terminator 2: Judgment Day, though with emerging concepts in nanotechnology, there may indeed be such a substance. The Ekumen is a form of slower-than-light interplanetary government found in Ursula K. Le Guin's The Left Hand of Darkness. Eptification is a kind of reeducation (EPT stands for Education for Particular Tasks) found in John Brunner's Stand on Zanzibar. Psychohistory and robopsychology are both inventions of Isaac Asimov. Scrith is the substance of which Larry Niven's Ringworld is built. The spindizzy generator is an antigravity device which operates on a fictional scientific principle, and can be found in James Blish's Cities in Flight. And elite conscription, which Snowfire commented on, is lifted from Joe Haldeman's novel The Forever War, in which the most highly educated humans are drafted to fight an alien menace. (Snowfire's idea of exactly what elite conscription is doesn't quite square with Haldeman's, but then I never elaborated on this until now.) Xenopsychology is a concept found in much modern SF, and things like antigravity, hyperspace and universal translators are old staples of the 40's and 50's.

I wouldn't want any of the fiction-specific techs to go into Civ III. But SF provides us with concepts toward which engineers can strive. SF has driven the technological progress of the twentieth century more than people realize. It's a way of extrapolating the possible as a means of hastening the practical. So I really wish people wouldn't write it off so quickly. On the other hand, we must exercise some judgment. Call to Power exercised very little judgment in its choices for futuristic units, and I wouldn't want Civ III to make the same errors.

Incidentally, in the summary, it looks as if one of the fiction-specific technologies (the "twin ion engine") made it into the "possibly realistic" section. Twin Ion Engine is the expanded form of the acronym TIE, as in TIE Fighter. Mind you, ion engines are entirely feasible and within our grasp, but they're horridly feeble little engines completely incompatible with manned space exploration. At best, they'd be adequate for sending a probe to Alpha Centauri or Barnard's or something.

Also, one of the possibly realistic techs, "zero point energy," somehow found its way into the "questionable" category. Not that I mind. There are two revolutionary ideas in science now. One of them is "superstring theory," an unprovable and unfortunate sideways step into mysticism, and the other is "zero point energy," which hypothesizes that the uncertainty principle makes true vacuum impossible, and thus all space, no matter how seemingly empty, contains a certain base amount of energy. Scientists seem equally drawn to both, and no one has come up with any proof other than a few pages full of equations and some zen-influenced diatribes. My money's on ZPE, though.

Anyway, I'm done. Back to your regular broadcast day.

Thanks for the descriptions though, they're a good bit of help. I'm also afraid that CivIII doesn't go down the dark road of CTP, with future warfare being conducted with "War Walkers" and "Plasmatica" (excuse me while I throw up). Again, there's "good" sci-fi and there's "bad" sci-fi. Things like "elite conscription-" well, I never read the novel, but I'm telling you right now that sacrificing the best members of your society as grunts is the exact opposite thing you want to do. Governments would much rather take the people on the welfare rolls and put them in the army. Of course, I have no problem with the educated ones (or the smart, unlucky people on welfare) being the technicians and the military scientists, which is how it works now.

However, most of the early part of your list could still use some clarification. So, is ICE a protection against someone putting a virus in your brain? What is the ekumen like?

And of course it IS old hat things like hyperspace. Doesn't make them any more likely. A universal translator simply cannot be done by a "stupid machine" (check out the AltaVista translator), the only thing that will ever translate languages perfectly is an AI.

On Zero-point energy- Victor G tells me that it means energy from nothing, basically. Since E=mc^2, energy is the same thing as mass, and by the law of conservation of mass, that ain't happening. What you describe seems to be more of a "Space Vacuum." And I would think that Solar Panels in space would be far more efficient in energy generation than sucking up the odd atom out in space.

Methos- I'll be sure to add that the next update.

In any case, great job on defining some of those future techs (esp. on the wakeways...i like that idea, but the cost would have to be staggering...)

------------------
Q Cubed
Renaissance Q • Q-of-all-trades
Thread Discussion Facilitator for Wonders

what application you learned would be somewhat based on chance (you would get like one free application with each theory)

if you decide to study like war applications, then you could get past applications, applications from the most recent theory, or an application from a theory only one step up, and you would not know what one you would get (like in blind research

there would be certain ages where you could no longer get past applications (why learn longbows when you have guns)

some theories would require different sets or groups of sets previous theories and applications as prerequisites

some applications might have different sets and groups of sets of previous theories and applications in order to build them too

an example would be a frigate, you would have to have the theory of map making, navigation, metalurgy, magnetism, and have the application of cannons (following the old civ2 techs and applications)

I'm sure that some better set of theories and applications could be thought of

theories would do nothing but allow more applications

this is realistic to have them seperate because they where throughout history that is how it has been

it takes theories and previous ideas on how to use them to make up new ides on how to use those already thought up applications for a new application

there should always be a chance (maybe affected by how obvious that application is, which would be a factor based on how many historical civilizations thought of it) of getting a related when you learn a theory or application

even if you don't get the related application it should get easier and easier for you to learn it when you learn a related theory or application (this makes sense, as you delve more and more into one area your understanding of that area grows)

these additional applications would be the sudden flashes of insight mentioned earlier

this would handle the longbow and other advances that not every civilization had because in this idea as in real life what you learn is based on your need, if you ask for war application at the proper time and you have the proper prerequisites then the longbow will be one of the applications that you will be able to get, (which one would be figured by blind research, if you wanted to complicate it farther the whole process could be affect on some level by nearby resources, such as no ship applications (nor maybe certain theories) if you have no cities by the sea or longbow comes up more often if there are a lot of trees by you)

Here is a notion that probably should be in Radical Ideas, and I suspect will be wildly unpopular:

How realistic is it that three other civs have a tech and the rest don't? I think that if three civs with whom you have contact have a tech you should also get it several turns later. The number turns to wait could correspond to how many beakers it takes to discover it in the first place (wait longer for Stealth than Pottery).

The first point is moot; it is there to keep the AI player on the same level as the human player - we can both look up the rules.txt and see what we need to get whatever. The second and third points are more agrivating to me (as a scientist) because they are not (always) true. I think that the amount of time that it takes to get a discovery should be (aside from a few modifiers, like cultural diversity or interaction with other research groups) random. I also think that you should control the general area that you want to go in (or unit that you would like to improove), but not be garanteed that that is the area that you will find a new tech. A lot of important technologies were discovered by accident (teflon for one), while the actual research was going in another direction.

Anyway, where was I... oh, yeah. I'm going to jabber on about future tech again, so anybody who's not interested can safely skip to the next topic.

The deal with William Gibson's ICE is that it's a kind of software guardian against all forms of intrusion into a computer system. It guards not only against viruses but against hackers. Since cyberspace is portrayed visually in most of his novels, ICE is usually depicted as just that, a thick wall of impenetrable ice that you can only break through with powerful "icebreaker" software. Some ICE is merely passively defensive, but other ICE is actively defensive, launching counterattack measures against the intruder, seeking to find his location, wipe out his computer system and report him to the authorities. Some ICE even launches preemptive strikes.

About elite conscription. SnowFire, your take on it pretty much matches Haldeman's. The concept is at once invented and ridiculed in the novel. The brain-drain effect is the top argument against such a system. However, its long-term detrimental effects are dismissed in favor of its short-term benefits, i.e., better trained and adaptable armies.

The Ekumen is a kind of quasi-governmental body that unites a number of planets. They have the ability to communicate instantly using a device Le Guin calls an "ansible," which operates on a fictional scientific principle called the "constant of simultaneity." Because FTL travel is impossible, the government is in most cases unable to dictate by force, and so it becomes instead a means for communication of ideas and a boon for interstellar trade. (Trade is, again, conducted at sublight speeds, but is not impossible, just very slow.) Second to communication, its purpose is to seek out inhabited worlds and make contact. Think of it as a kind of United Federation of Planets without a Starfleet. Travelers are usually placed in suspended animation and are fully susceptible to "tile dilation" effects as well.

Hey, there's one I've missed. Suspended animation! Called by various names throughout SF literature and film... cryogenic suspension, cryo-sleep, hypersleep, whatever you call it. Nobody's 100% percent sure if a biological organism could really survive being frozen for hundreds of years, but we've got plenty of time to find out. And we've got a handful of people who've frozen themselves at the point of death ("corpsicles," as they're called in modern SF) on whom to experiment.

The idea of multiple routes to a given technology, where one or more routes could be turned on or off in a given game, is also nice. That way, after you've played a few dozen games, you STILL don't know how to reach your long term goals.

"You always knew how to get to a specific tech"

Is addressed by items 28 (RANDOM TECH TREE!) and 37 (TECHNOLOGY HORIZON), so I don't think you should dismiss the "problem" as insoluble.

"The results of your research were always predictable"

This is also spoken to by some of the summary items, for example 32 (RANDOMIZED APPLICATIONS). It seems like you have a bit more in mind than that, though.

"I think that the amount of time that it takes to get a discovery should be (aside from a few modifiers, like cultural diversity or interaction with other research groups) random."

I think you are saying that you support 52 (LESS DETERMINISTIC RESEARCH PROGRESS), right?

These suggestions in the summary seem related to your concerns. Do they address them fully, or should they be expanded somehow? Could you be a bit more concrete about what you are asking for?

n.c.: "How realistic is it that three other civs have a tech and the rest don't?"

Octopus - Yes 28 & 37 address my first point rather well.

As for my second point, what I mean is that sometimes research in one area (let's say new semi-conductor materials) leads to a breakthrough in a totally different area (a new fuel). I guess the random possibility of a breakthrough in an unrelated area is what I am saying.