|
Author
|
|
Topic: Future tech...(same boring ol topic) |  |
|
AzNtoccata
Settler
Jan 2001
|
 |
posted January 31, 2001 00:09
   | 
 |
 |  |
So just a survey:-no future tech! they stink ass! -up to about cloning and space colonies -up to nanotech -up to singularity, temporal mechanics, starships |
Roman
Warlord
Bratislava, Slovakia
Sep 2000
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 05:58
 |
|
| |
I vote for number 1. Since this is a frequently repeated topic I just copied my comments from another thread.No future techs, please!! That is the main point that spoiled CTP for me, which otherwise has some decent mechanics (wages, PW, etc.). As to the problem of shutting of research after the player has everything, it cannot be solved, but can equally effectively be delayed by making the tech tree denser rather than go into the future. I you really have to include future technologies, at least make them only very close in the future and only those that already exist, but are not yet in practical use, for example fuel cells, or fusion. Anyway it simply is not possible to make any sound projections for our technological development more than 50 years into the future and even these are very inaccurate.
I want to reiterate, please no future techs, especially no warp drives, cold fusion (which was in fact a scientific hoax) and so on. |
Roman
Warlord
Bratislava, Slovakia
Sep 2000
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 06:00
|
|
| |
Another copy of my previous post:Hmm, looking at the gallery on civ 3 homepage, I cannot find any futuristic renders or animations. This I think makes it safe to assume there will be no future techs in civ 3, or at least they will not stretch very far out into the future. Hurray, long live Sid!! It seems my atheistic prayers have been answered. |
wittlich
Warlord
Fayetteville, NC, USA
Dec 2000
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 10:53
|
|
| |
I vote for up to nantechnologies, but drop space colonies (keep cloning).
|
Grumbold
Warlord
London, UK
Mar 2000
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 10:58
|
|
| |
I vote for a game so well balanced that you can't have a runaway technological society discovering all the techs before 2000 anyway. |
wittlich
Warlord
Fayetteville, NC, USA
Dec 2000
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 11:02
|
|
| |
quote:
Originally posted by Grumbold on 01-31-2001 10:58 AM
I vote for a game so well balanced that you can't have a runaway technological society discovering all the techs before 2000 anyway.
|
Touche' Grumbold! 
|
Jer8m8
Chieftain
New York, America
Nov 2000
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 12:14
|
|
| |
I think I vote for four. I want to have bases in multiple solar systems, be fighting for posseion of a star on the other side of the galaxy, and be mining asteroids in the Kuiper Belt. IMO, the end game should be sending a manned ship to the Andromeda galaxy |
Grumbold
Warlord
London, UK
Mar 2000
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 12:24
|
|
| |
Your civilisation has discovered space flight and the evidence of active alien civilisations..in a panic a general world council is held and elects you planetary governor for the duration of the crisis..please insert your Master of Orion CD.. |
DarkCloud
King
of Clouds
Jul 2000
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 16:15
 |
|
| |
Up to cloning and space colonization. |
Mister Pleasant
Settler
New Orleans, LA 70130
Jan 2001
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 17:18
|
|
| |
As long as there are no space colonies (ala CTP1, which I might add I removed from my version). And of course some future tech is fine. Especially SDI and uh . . . uh . . . THE FRICKEN UNITY SHIP! So maybe nano-tech (cloning and retro virus therapy ARE present technologies for the most part so if they are not included you are not playing up to the present day). But I agree with that other guy, when it's time to colonze other planets, its time to put Space Empires IV in the old DVD ROM drive . . . |
Shadowstrike
King
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Jul 2000
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 18:36
|
|
| |
Y'know, nanotechnology isn't as far away as we think. We might very well get it before building orbital cities.... BTW, I'd vote for Option #2. |
Transcend
Warlord
Boulder, Colorado, USA
Apr 99
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 19:57
|
|
| |
As far as nanotechnology goes, we are already beginning to build quantum transistors, transistors that use the quantum properties(tunnel effect) of electrons to perform switching functions. HP Labs, Intel, and several research institutes such as MIT have already built first working prototypes. Even though these early devices are still very sensitive to external noises and have a long way to go to enter mass production, we don't have to wait very long for that day. |
technophile
King
of pain
Jul 1999
|
|
posted January 31, 2001 20:25
|
|
| |
Now that I've learned that MOO3 is coming out in 2002, I will be be satisfied with or without future technology. As I see it the biggest problem with future tech is that it will be incomplete without the ability to colonize the moon/Mars/Venus/the asteroid belt (it seems silly to be able to bend time and space and yet be unable to create a colony on the moon), and yet colonization is probably beyond the scope of the game (it might require the addition of space combat, star fortresses, planetary defense systems, and other items more appropriate to an interstellar Civ-type game like MOO2). Nanotech without colonization would be all well and good; temporal manipulation is going too far.In Masters of Orion II the problem of tech research after all techs have been developed is handled by creating extremely expensive future techs that provide some minor benefits. The most expensive regular technology costs 15,000 RP's; each future tech costs 25,000 RP's base cost plus 10,000 * (the advanced tech level), so Hyper Advanced Construction III will cost 45,000 RP's to research. I almost always play a tech-mongering race, and even I have trouble coming up with 95,000 research points in under ten turns. The benefits of future techs were more than just ways to garner more points; each tech provided minor benefits. For example, a Stellar Converter (the weapon on the Death Star) takes up 500 space on a starship; since starships have a maximum of 1500 space, this means that you can put on at most 2 stellar converters as well as the necessary peripherals (shields, armor, ship drive, etc). However, each future tech provided a slight miniaturization to the Stellar Converter; about future tech 10 (costing 115,000 research points to acquire) the Stellar Converter has shrunk down to only take up 200 space, meaning that you can cram five or six of them onto a starship. It took a long time to glean any benefits from future technology (a Stellar Converter that takes up 450 space instead of 500 is not much benefit), but unlike Civ and SMAC future technology did provide some minor benefits. Regardless of how high the Civ III tech tree goes, I think that future tech could be better handled in the manner of MOO2, with exponentially increasing research costs and minor benefits granted. For example, in Civ III a howitzer might cost 200 shields, but after 20 future tech advances (at an exponentially increasing RP cost) it might only cost 50 shields. It doesn't seem too unreasonable to me that a Civ willing to spend a hundred turns in order to reseach twenty future techs should receive a minor reward for its pains. |
cyclotron7
Chieftain
California
Jan 2001
|
 |
posted February 01, 2001 00:41
|
|
| |
But wouldn't this break down at some point, when everything cost a nearly negligible amount? What would be the point anymore? I like the above system, but there needs to be some kind of limit. I also think (far out theory) that future tech should be random. That's right. I mean, each future tech you get gives you bonus points, and then has a random possibility to gain a particular benefit like some mentioned above. Either that, or a CTP style future tech system, where each tech reduced pollution a bit or a similar benefit. But wait... what's the point of that if you've got the Gaia Controller? Oops... I better quit, I'm getting into CTP-bashing mode... |
Grumbold
Warlord
London, UK
Mar 2000
|
|
posted February 01, 2001 06:07
|
|
| |
I'd forgotten the MOO2 system. Yes, if we absolutely have to have empires capable of immense research output then that would be an excellent way to go. With a few different types of future tech you could gradually decrease construction costs, support costs, pollution and increase combat effectiveness and movement rates. With escalating research costs it should be possible to exclude the possibility of anyone getting past construction/support/eco/military tech 10 even on a gigantic map where a single nation owns the whole world bar one small city eking out a living on the antarctic coast.
I would be happy for the tech tree to culminate before the construction of any interstellar craft like the Unity. The obvious precursor stages to an interstellar colony ship are interplanetary craft, asteroid mining, orbital power and colonies on other planetary bodies inside this solar system. Unless Civ 3 can handle them indirectly as required wonders which some nation(s) must build before interstellar craft can be built then the leap directly from the Apollo Project to the Unity is just too vast. |
Vrank Prins
Chieftain
Haarlem, Netherlands
Sep 2000
|
|
posted February 01, 2001 11:42
|
|
| |
I'm voting for option 1.
For my comment read the thread "The Future", or else I'm going to have say things I've already said two or three before. |
Roman
Warlord
Bratislava, Slovakia
Sep 2000
|
|
posted February 01, 2001 14:11
|
|
| |
I personally hate future techs. Hovewer, even I would agree to the MOO2 system you described above i.e. incremental decreases in pollution, or unit costs, or range, etc. and exponentially increasing costs of research. I think, though, that the improvements should really be very gradual indeed.
This does solve the problem of player turning off the research after researching all the techs and keeps us who hate various futuristic units, etc. happy. Good job whoever suggested this. I propose someone sends this to Firaxis. |
tniem
Prince
Grand Rapids
Apr 2000
|
|
posted February 01, 2001 17:21
|
|
| |
I guess it depends on when the game ends. If it ends around 2020, than human cloning is a real possibility. It was announced earlier this week that scientists will clone their first human by 2003 in a country where the government won't stop the experiments.So, if the game goes past 2000, then cloning in some way (maybe just a wonder) should be included. As should the Human Genome, neither being an actual future tech by the time the game is released. As for going past that, I really don't think it is that great of an idea. Possibly nanotechnology, but I really don't want to have space colonies that I have to control at the same time as my Earth civ. It just isn't what I figure is very fun. |
Trachmir
Settler
Miami, Fl USA
Dec 2000
|
|
posted February 07, 2001 06:31
|
|
| |
There must be future techs in civ3 (I hope they extend the ending year to 2100), and should account for about 1/8 of the tech tree... but I think the question is what do you consider future techs? Laser-Fusion, Human Cloning, Genetic Manipulation, Nanotechnology, Neural-Interface (using myomuscular (sp?) neural feedback), Robotic War-Machines, Underwater Colonization, and even worm-holes and antimatter are NOT future tech... they are simply unpolished not-yet-implemented modern technology... this is the 21st century, what many would consider to be sci-fi is actually sci-fact. Why sell the game short because of a few technophopes? If you are talking about an end game of 2020... that's less than 2 decades, and much of what I listed above will be implemented.
I do agree that any "future tech" must be theorectically sound, and plausable in the near future (say 50 years)... and definatly add more too the past, but don't cut short our future!
|
SI
Settler
MPLS, MN, USA
Feb 2001
|
|
posted February 07, 2001 12:51
|
|
| |
I would vote #1, no future techs. I would rather see a n expansion of the ancient and middle ages period of the game, so they are more than a time to try to build as many cities as you can. I would be willing to buy an expansion pack with future techs if it means a better basic game.
|
Theben
Emperor
"Life is a swirling cesspool of despair."
b.02-15-99
|
|
posted February 07, 2001 19:33
|
|
| |
Up to orbital stations and craft. No colonies, except abstract ones sending in minerals, etc. from asteroids or the moon (even these would be stations only, and frequently lost due to operating in an unknown environment).Even the spy sats/combat sats could be abstracted: +% to espionage, % chance to kill a sat/station with killer sats, etc. Keep future tech, with the reductions or with my suggestion on another thread (1% increases per future tech). |
Odin
Settler
Ulen, Minnesota, U.S.A
Sep 2000
|
|
posted February 10, 2001 13:13
|
|
| |
All the way to #4, This gives us the option of colonizing planets. Also undersea colonies like in CTP1&2. |
joseph1944
Chieftain
Napa, Ca. USA
Jul 2000
|
|
posted February 10, 2001 17:25
|
|
| |
There is this little old place about 40 mile south of Napa located in the town of Livermore Ca. on interstate 580 east bound call Lawrence Livermore Lab. Inside of that lab they have a little old item call EMP gun (Electrical Magnetic Pulse Gun. Granted it would take two 18 wheelers to haul it anywhere but it's there nevertheless. So the question is how long before it is man size?------------------
|
cyclotron7
Chieftain
California
Jan 2001
|
 |
posted February 10, 2001 18:39
|
|
| |
Or, we could have a vehicle called the "go-back-in-time-and-destroy-all-other-civs-while-they-are-still-settlers gun."  When must it stop, people? We aren't talking about realism, we're talking about gameplay. Future techs only water down the tech tree and create fanciful things that are quite hard to visualize. Besides, CTP I botched the job so thouroughly that I dread CTP-style future techs cotaiminating Civ3. Stuff within the near future, up to human cloning and orbital sattelites are good, but most of the rest of it has no basis for reality and is whimsical at best. Stuff like wormholes aren't even remotely feasable... to open a wormhole to more than an infinitecimal size it would take more energy than is currently available in the universe, let alone the galzxy, let a lone a relativley tiny civilization of bipedal carbon-based life forms. I'm not a technophobe, I just want a good game. |
technophile
King
of pain
Jul 1999
|
|
posted February 10, 2001 23:05
|
|
| |
I don't even see what the point of being able to create a wormhole in a Civ game would be. Why would you use a wormhole unless you're trying to leave the solar system? Why would you want to leave the solar system in a Civ game? Certainly not to colonize other solar systems; it takes me several hours just to colonize Earth, let alone the entire galaxy. If you're not leaving the solar system then slower-than-light travel should suffice; in SMAC we were already able to instantly transport tanks all the way across the globe using orbital insertions, plus I don't even want to think of what would happen if we suddenly opened a wormhole from Detroit to Shanghai.In regards to cloning: In Masters of Orion one of the structures you could build was a cloning center, which would increase the population growth of your colony. The cloning center did not clone entirely new humans (or psilons, or sakkra, or whatever); the cloning centers were basically advanced medical centers where failing or missing body parts could be replaced. It didn't increase the birth rate, it decreased the death rate. In regards to Civ III a similar technology may be appropriate; the structure resulting from the tech needn't be called anything futuristic like "cloning center," instead something along the lines of "advanced medical center" would suffice. Being able to clone a new human would unbalance Civ III, in my opinion; if you double your population every turn then you can crush your opponents just by outbreeding them. |
Trachmir
Settler
Miami, Fl USA
Dec 2000
|
|
posted February 11, 2001 01:06
|
|
| |
The comments about worm-holes were related to another post I made in a diffrent thread... I suggested that opening a worm-hole as the Science Victory condition (i.e., the End of the game)BTW, it is theorized that opening a worm-hole through 4-space around a rotating body of signifigant mass (read: Planet), could tap into "echos" of the present... thus energy could be drawn from a "limited-infinite" of layers, therby producing enough power to open a worm-hole... the second theory involves creating a worm-hole on a subatomic scale, the using antimatter within a controled EM field to "pry" the "opening" larger. I agree this tech is far off, but for a science victory you need something "show-stopping", what better than setting the stage for galatic (or trans-galatic) exploration/colonization.
[This message has been edited by Trachmir (edited February 11, 2001).] |
bagdar
Chieftain
Turkey
Jan 2001
|
|
posted February 11, 2001 05:07
|
|
| |
whoa... It'd be great to send my Nano-Mano-Ranger-Ninja's through that hole and... whatever. | |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
