Technology Catagorize

Jeremy Buloch · January 24, 2003, 16:23

Should we have a Tech tree ala civ style or should we have tech fields, or tech sphere? Any other suggestions can be posted.
I pick Tech Tree.
-J.B.-

Michiel · January 24, 2003, 16:26

I vote Spheregrid. Because it's my idea.

But maybe I was too fast. Please explain Tech field.

Jeremy Buloch · January 24, 2003, 16:34

Quote:

I think that much more interesting question is "How these techs are obtained?". By now, we have a "plenty" of options, for example
- tech tree (like Civs or Acsendancy, for example)
- tech fields (like Stars!)
- hybrid or custom schemes
While my opinion may appear a bit offtopic at first glance, you may figure out that the answer may lead to more or less detailed tech subdivision. For example, tech fields means a broad range of mutualy independent "inventions" tied to specific tech levels. Tech trees are completerly another story.

That is why I put the Tech Field option. D'oh I should have put Hybrid.
-J.B.-

Michiel · January 24, 2003, 17:23

I see, nope. Tech field = bad. One technology requires another. (Except for the starters)

Gateway103 · January 24, 2003, 20:28

Well, even Sphere Grid is somewhat limited in that you must go one direction to obtain certain techs. And should we decide to try some other tech that was in the opposite direction, you either have to proceed forward and eventually come back in a full circle or through some branch points, or backtrack through your route. Obviousely, we won't have Teleport, Return, Friend Spheres, and etc.

Therefore, a sphere grid may actually be more confusing.

Anyway, that's my thought on sphere grids for StP. I haven't voted yet, I still need to think about this a bit more...

-Gateway103

Chaos Theory · January 25, 2003, 15:21

In general, I favor trees, since even if you want to beeline for a tech, the nature of the tree forces you to pick up plenty of peripheral techs (IA and SotHB in SMAC aren't far enough up the tree for this to work). Furthermore, research could be handled in more of a MOO I way: you allocate research fractions to each category of research. Allocating larger fractions gives diminishing returns, while neglected fields can even lose progress, though not to the point of losing a tech. I don't understand tech fields real well, and if the tech sphere grid is based on FF10, it doesn't look like a good idea for a scifi game, since it would encourage beelining even more.

Michiel · January 25, 2003, 16:34

Allright. So no sphere grid then. It was just an idea.

But maybe it would be a good idea to include something like spheres. Even in a basic Tech tree. And we don't call them spheres, but something like: "Scientists" or "Motivation-points". Of course you can't find them like in FFX, but maybe you can gain them over time. And the more research facilities you have built, the faster you get them. You could make them required for a new tech. Maybe really advanced techs need more of them. Maybe if we thing on a larger scale, some techs need 100 of them, etc. Again, just another idea.

Oh, and what's beelining?

Jeremy Buloch · January 25, 2003, 16:46

Well I would like to keep it simple and yet very nice. A tech tree has proven in many games that it is GREAT! Its easy, familar, and nicely put. Each tech goes to another tech which in turn can go into other tech(s). I go with Tech Tree.
-J.B.-

Chaos Theory · January 25, 2003, 17:03

Beelining is going for a tech several levels away, neglecting anything not on the path to that tech. Blind research thwarts this very effectively, and trees force any beeline to cover a variety of lower-level techs. Any tech structure that allows a player to grab a tech several levels up while he has only a few lower-level techs will only encourage beelining, which magnifies imbalances in techs and in the game.

Gateway103 · January 25, 2003, 21:13

For me, I prefer the following research model (adapted and expanded from the research model of Master of Orion 3).

First, there are a certain number of THEORETICAL FIELDS of research, for the sake of the argument, let's say there are 6 of them. And they are:
1) Biological Sciences
2) Economics and Business
3) Energy
4) Mathematics and Computers
5) Social Sciences
6) Physical Sciences

Every faction will have a value in each FIELD indicating their proficiency in that respective field. Obviously, the level value will increase through additional researches.

----------------------------------------
Then, there are APPLICAIONS. These are the actual inventions that the players can implement to benefit his/her/its factions/empires.

Now each APPLICATION technology will have its own pre-requisites in various fields. That is, every APPLICATION will have the following stats:
Application Name: (self-explanatory)
Primary pre-requisite: (1 ~ 3 Fields)
Secondary pre-requisite: (several possible option)
Tertiary & Quaternary Fields: (if necessary)
Special Restrictions: (as needed)

Quote:

To illustrate this, let us use the invention of Sentient Algorithms from SMAC. This APPLICATION may have the following states...

Application Name:
- Sentient Algorithms
Primary pre-requisite:
- Level 16 (+/- 2) in Mathematics and Computers, AND
- Level 10 (+/- 1) in Social Sciences
Secondary pre-requisite:
- Level 8 or 9 standing in Energy, OR
- Level 13 standing in Physical Sciences, OR
- Average standing of Level 10 in all Fields
Tertiary & Quaternary Fields:
- Nothing
Special Restrictions:
- Must already acquired Optical Computer
- Must already acquired Cyber-Ethics

----------------------------------------
To begin, notice the "(+/- 2)" in the above example? This does not mean the players need as low as Level 14 in Mathematics and Computers. Rather, it means that when the game starts, the computer randomly sets the requisite level of this tech (in Math & Comps) to be from 14~18. The primary purposes of this is to increase replayability, where the player will not know precisely when an APPLICATION will be available for research. (same for "Level 8 or 9")

Now, notice the "and" and "or" logic operator used above. Specifically, for Secondary pre-requisites (and tertiary, and so on), the player need only satisfy one of three possible choices. Furthermore, again to increase replayability and add a sense of unknown to the tech tree, not all 3 possible secondary pre-requisite may appear in each game (again determined in the beginning of the game). You may have all 3 in your first game, then only 2 of them the next, and perhaps even just 1 the game after. This prevents or reduces the possibility of always going for that tested-and-true research path, since the path will be different each time.

----------------------------------------
Ok, then how does the process of research actually work?

First, player must decide how much Research Points to allocate to each THEORETICAL FIELD and APPLICATION researches. Let's say I generate 1000 Research Points per turn, and I decided to allocate 10% to each FIELD (i.e. a total of 60%), and the rest 40% to APPLICATION (Note, may use numerical input instead, but for now let's just go with it).

Now every turn, my faction's understanding for each THEORETICAL FIELDs increases steadily, advancing my level accordingly. Of course, theories are good, but they are useless if I cannot implement them in inventions that would benefit my society. This is where the RPs allocation to APPLICATION comes in.

Depending on my FIELD levels, I may or may not have possible APPLICATIONS to research. As a rule, the name of an APPLICATION invention will appear if and only if the Primary Pre-quisites are met. But if there are any other pre-quisities that are not met, this APPLICATION still cannot be research yet. Nevertheless, once the name appeared in the list (despite being grayed out), I can click on it and get some description of the invention, as well as perquisites needed for it (as determined at the start of the game). For example, in this particular game, I have finally got to Level 17 in Maths & Comps, and Sentient Algorithm suddenly appeared as a one of the APPLICATIONS. Curious, I noticed I couldn't research it yet, so I click on it to find out why. In this game, the info may be the following.

Quote:

Application Name:
- Sentient Algorithms
Description:
- (technobabbles)
Primary pre-requisite:
- Level 17 in Mathematics and Computers, AND
- Level 10 in Social Sciences
Secondary pre-requisite:
- Level 13 standing in Physical Sciences
Special Restrictions:
- Must already acquired Optical Computer
- Must already acquired Cyberethics
Misc:
- (self-explanatory)

Ah, I notice that while I already have Level 17 in Maths & Comps, as well as Level 10 in Social-Sci (recall I must meet the bare Primary pre-requisites for the name to even appear), I do not have Cyberethics nor a Level 13 standing in Physical-Sci. Therefore, I know what actions I need to take in order to research this technology in the future, provided I want it.

Now notice that as eluded above, not all of the Secondary pre-requisites are activated in each game. Those that aren't are not displayed at all.

----------------------------------------
Anyway, say there are 7 possible APPLICATIONS listed, of the 7 only 5 of them are researchable at the moment, because I lack some pre-quisites for the other 2 (e.g. recall Sentient Algo. example above). Now I can decide which of the 5 APPLICATIONS to research, and how much RPs to allocate to each. I can either research one of them at a time, or a number of them simultaneously.

Now why would I want to research more than one APPLICATION at a time? While it may be apparent in the case of FIELD, since the player cannot be sure when a certain APPLICATION will become available, this is not the case of APPLICATION. Well, a player will be encouraged to do so via 3 main methods, Interest, Diminishing Returns, and Roadblocks.

Interest refers to the fact that player gains a bonus in researching any particular technology depending on the amount of RPs already spent and the duration of research (more RPs and longer time yields more interest.) This applies not only to APPLCIATIONS, but THEORETICAL FIELDS too, although slightly different in formulas (making constant adjustment a less attractive idea, thus promoting long-term planning)

There is also an "inertial" stage when a tech is just being funded, usually in the beginning. At this time, a negative interest (in %) is actually earned, which fade away as time passes. This is used to represent the effort of getting things started. Obviously then, the constantly one-tech-at-a-time approach would suffer quiet significantly in the long run in this case.

The method of Diminishing Returns is probably familiar to you, basically, there exist some optimal level of funding that is most efficient. Beyond that level you get less and less research benefit for the funding you put in, similarly for under-funding (you can even lose progress, although not already researched technology).

Lastly, Roadblocks. As mentioned above, an APPLICATION appears if and only if all its Primary pre-requisites are met. An APPLICATION is RESEARCHABLE, if and only if all of its pre-requisites, as determined in the beginning of the game, are met. In other words, as soon as all bare requirements are met, you can research the invention. However, you run the risk of Roadblocks.

When researching any APPLICATION, there is always the threat of Roadblocks. The amount of risk decreases as one's relative FIELD level relative to the pre-quisites increases. The risk reduction is more significant for every higher FIELD level in the same FIELD as the Primary pre-quisites of the APPLICATION in question, and less so if otherwise. Consequently, start researching an APPLICATION as soon as it is available, and put all RPs into this single APPLICATION, can be very risky to say the least. (Faction profiles may increase or reduce the overall risk)

So what is a Roadblock? Well, this means your research effort has come to a trouble spot, or stagnations. The project has not failed, but it isn't proceeding much either yet. All fundings in this APPLICATION will have little effect, although decrease in funding may lead to progress drop. There are two possible outcomes to encountering a Roadblock. The duration in which either of the outcomes will occur is random, but generally not too long (1~10 turns perhaps)
1) After a certain time, you may eventually pass the bottleneck, and the research will continue as normal (i.e. normal progress increase). You may even complete the research right away (if you are lucky ^_^)
2) Your research came to a complete dead end, i.e. it failed. This means you need to re-start researching this APPLICATION from scratch, that is 0% completion status, (although you do gain %RP bonus for this APPLICATION for RPs put in it henceforth)

Roadblocks are indeed troublesome, yet encountering them isn't the end of the world. There are also some beneficial side effects to a roadblock that may occur. I.e., when you finally got through the bottleneck or have failed, your scientists may gain some insights from their effort/failure. This could be in the forms of:
1) a sudden increase in the completion status of the APPLICATION in question
2) perhaps it might be an increase in some FIELD level standing (or their progress status)
3) A small number of extra Research Points become available for the next few turns
4) etc.

Note, Roadblocks can also happen to THEORETICAL FIELD researches, although the chance of encountering is low, and the probability of complete failure is much rarer while the possible occurrence of beneficial side effects (those that are applicable) are more frequent.

----------------------------------------
Some other notes on numbers and tech cost.

I did not like Civ's model of tech cost, where the cost of a technology is dependent on the number of tech you already have. while it was like that for play-balance reason, I really did not like it.

Instead, I think the BASE COST for APPLICATION should depend on its pre-quisites, basically making higher level technology more costly; while the ACTUAL COST is also affected by some random factors determined in the beginning of the game, as well as relative Field standings (making lower tech a lot cheaper to research). When researching, the player should never been given the value of the COST, but instead is informed of an estimate of the number of turns that may be needed, based on the funding level. This estimate is not to be always accurate, but whose accuracy increases but the relative FIELD level between player's faction's level standings and that of the APPLICATION.

Quote:

For example, say the ACTUAL COST of an APPLICATION is 2000, and I dedicate 200 RPs to the project each turn.

If my FIELD level is the same as the tech pre-quisites, the estimate may be as low as 5 turns, or as high as 20 turns.

However, if my FIELD level is a bit higher (which would reduce the ACTUAL COST a bit, but let's not worry about that part yet), the estimate improves and may be from 8 up to 14 turns.

Similar system would also work for THEORETICAL FIELDS, except there won't have anything resemble relative FIELD standings, but the estimate error range may be even higher.

----------------------------------------
Conclusion

The above is a simple overview of the research model I prefer. I realize it may sound quiet complex and perhaps confusing, thanks to my semi-coherent writing, I must note that most of the mechanics are "under the hood," i.e. the players won't see.

From a player's perspective, he/she will know only a few things:
1) The tech tree vary from time to time, there is no one golden path that would always work, as the pre-quisites may change from time to time. This makes the game more repayable.
2) It is not beneficial to rush funding a research project, unless it is absolutely necessary. Putting all the eggs in one basket can have serious consequences should a roadblock occurs.
3) Do not trust the estimates I see on the research screen whole heartedly. They are there to give me some idea of the time the research may take, but are by no mean necessarily accurate, not to mention roadblocks can in principle occur at the final step towards completion.
4) The Research Model is kind of like blind research when it comes to THEORETICAL FIELD and when any given APPLICATION may pop up. However, I do have control over the specific APPLICATION I want to research.

Now there are some ideas I am toying:
1) Technology Shock idea (originally conceived for MOO3, but was not implemented).

Tech Shock is a feature intended to keep technology research on a smooth pace, rather than the crazy 1-tech-discovery-per-turn frenzy (or even 2 or 3 tech!) that can plague the game (e.g. SMAC/X, Civ2). Basically, the concept is that the society cannot cope/deal with all these new inventions should they arrive too quickly (ethical/moral acceptance, adjustment of world views, etc). As such, should a myriad number of new technology come popping up in a short time, there will be social backlashes. Of course, the danger of tech shock would also depend on the kinds of technology invented. Frontier researches are more likely to scare people than the wheels

Other games, like Civilization 3, attempts to maintain a smooth tech-research path by setting a minimum number of turns restriction between inventions. Tech Shock can be thought of as a incentive rather than a restriction, compare to Civ3's method.

2) Complete blind research option

This shouldn't be too difficult to code. It can be done simply by not allowing the players to adjust the funding level for specific APPLICATION, and allocate RPs for APPLICATION category evenly among all available APPLICATIONS. The player can, of course, still view the estimated progress, as well as click on the tech to see a description of it. This way the same GUI will still be usable, no need to change it. This would, of course, be a game setup option.

3) Adaptive Blind research option, or Need-Driven model

This is conceivable much harder to design and may even frustrate players. Nevertheless, the idea is that while the player still retain control over allocation of RPs among various FIELDS and the category of APPLICATION as a whole, the funding level of individual APPLICATION are not even as was in Complete blind research model. The actual funding level of each individual APPLICATION invention is influenced by allocation to each FIELD, as well as the need of the society. Moreover, players aren't allowed to see the individual funding level of APPLICATION inventions, except its description, and maybe progress estimation.

For example, if the society is involved in an offensive war, offensive military technology may be given priorities (but a major defeat may shift the focus to defensive capabilities). However, when a society is at peace, planet development technology will be given priorities. Now the transition isn't a sharp, but gradual one. Other factors that may influence funding are governmental policies, diplomatic relations, faction profiles, planet conditions, plan randomness, and etc.

This research model may perhaps more "realistic," but significantly harder to design and balance. In addition, it may lessen player's fun but taking away the control. However, this model can provide very interesting gaming.

----------------------------------------
Just another of my incessant babbling... ^_^

For some information on the inspiration for the above model (i.e. the original, not the final, moo3 model), follow the link below.
http://moo3.quicksilver.com/official/tech01.html

-Gateway103

Gateway103 · January 25, 2003, 21:13

[Edit: content erased. The post was too long and Apolyton didn't like it... not to mention it is double posted.]

[Mod, please delete this post, thanks]

-Gateway103

Gateway103 · January 25, 2003, 21:13

[Edit: content erased. The post was too long and Apolyton didn't like it... not to mention it is double posted.]

[Mod, please delete this post, thanks]

-Gateway103

Gateway103 · January 25, 2003, 21:16

DOH.... too long... and double postings....

Ras, please delete the those two posts above

I'll try posting it again...

-Gateway103

Gateway103 · January 25, 2003, 21:18

Ok... my first attempt was evidently too long... and Apolyton didn't like it... guess I'll split it into 3 parts.

Gateway's Crazy Thoughts. Part 1
For me, I prefer the following research model (adapted and expanded from the research model of Master of Orion 3).

First, there are a certain number of THEORETICAL FIELDS of research, for the sake of the argument, let's say there are 6 of them. And they are:
1) Biological Sciences
2) Economics and Business
3) Energy
4) Mathematics and Computers
5) Social Sciences
6) Physical Sciences

Every faction will have a value in each FIELD indicating their proficiency in that respective field. Obviously, the level value will increase through additional researches.

----------------------------------------
Then, there are APPLICAIONS. These are the actual inventions that the players can implement to benefit his/her/its factions/empires.

Now each APPLICATION technology will have its own pre-requisites in various fields. That is, every APPLICATION will have the following stats:
Application Name: (self-explanatory)
Primary pre-requisite: (1 ~ 3 Fields)
Secondary pre-requisite: (several possible option)
Tertiary & Quaternary Fields: (if necessary)
Special Restrictions: (as needed)

Quote:

To illustrate this, let us use the invention of Sentient Algorithms from SMAC. This APPLICATION may have the following states...

Application Name:
- Sentient Algorithms
Primary pre-requisite:
- Level 16 (+/- 2) in Mathematics and Computers, AND
- Level 10 (+/- 1) in Social Sciences
Secondary pre-requisite:
- Level 8 or 9 standing in Energy, OR
- Level 13 standing in Physical Sciences, OR
- Average standing of Level 10 in all Fields
Tertiary & Quaternary Fields:
- Nothing
Special Restrictions:
- Must already acquired Optical Computer
- Must already acquired Cyber-Ethics

----------------------------------------
To begin, notice the "(+/- 2)" in the above example? This does not mean the players need as low as Level 14 in Mathematics and Computers. Rather, it means that when the game starts, the computer randomly sets the requisite level of this tech (in Math & Comps) to be from 14~18. The primary purposes of this is to increase replayability, where the player will not know precisely when an APPLICATION will be available for research. (same for "Level 8 or 9")

Now, notice the "and" and "or" logic operator used above. Specifically, for Secondary pre-requisites (and tertiary, and so on), the player need only satisfy one of three possible choices. Furthermore, again to increase replayability and add a sense of unknown to the tech tree, not all 3 possible secondary pre-requisite may appear in each game (again determined in the beginning of the game). You may have all 3 in your first game, then only 2 of them the next, and perhaps even just 1 the game after. This prevents or reduces the possibility of always going for that tested-and-true research path, since the path will be different each time.

----------------------------------------
Ok, then how does the process of research actually work?

First, player must decide how much Research Points to allocate to each THEORETICAL FIELD and APPLICATION researches. Let's say I generate 1000 Research Points per turn, and I decided to allocate 10% to each FIELD (i.e. a total of 60%), and the rest 40% to APPLICATION (Note, may use numerical input instead, but for now let's just go with it).

Now every turn, my faction's understanding for each THEORETICAL FIELDs increases steadily, advancing my level accordingly. Of course, theories are good, but they are useless if I cannot implement them in inventions that would benefit my society. This is where the RPs allocation to APPLICATION comes in.

Depending on my FIELD levels, I may or may not have possible APPLICATIONS to research. As a rule, the name of an APPLICATION invention will appear if and only if the Primary Pre-quisites are met. But if there are any other pre-quisities that are not met, this APPLICATION still cannot be research yet. Nevertheless, once the name appeared in the list (despite being grayed out), I can click on it and get some description of the invention, as well as perquisites needed for it (as determined at the start of the game). For example, in this particular game, I have finally got to Level 17 in Maths & Comps, and Sentient Algorithm suddenly appeared as a one of the APPLICATIONS. Curious, I noticed I couldn't research it yet, so I click on it to find out why. In this game, the info may be the following.

Quote:

Application Name:
- Sentient Algorithms
Description:
- (technobabbles)
Primary pre-requisite:
- Level 17 in Mathematics and Computers, AND
- Level 10 in Social Sciences
Secondary pre-requisite:
- Level 13 standing in Physical Sciences
Special Restrictions:
- Must already acquired Optical Computer
- Must already acquired Cyberethics
Misc:
- (self-explanatory)

Ah, I notice that while I already have Level 17 in Maths & Comps, as well as Level 10 in Social-Sci (recall I must meet the bare Primary pre-requisites for the name to even appear), I do not have Cyberethics nor a Level 13 standing in Physical-Sci. Therefore, I know what actions I need to take in order to research this technology in the future, provided I want it.

Now notice that as eluded above, not all of the Secondary pre-requisites are activated in each game. Those that aren't are not displayed at all.

----------------------------------------

Gateway103 · January 25, 2003, 21:22

Gateway's Crazy Idea, Part 2

Anyway, say there are 7 possible APPLICATIONS listed, of the 7 only 5 of them are researchable at the moment, because I lack some pre-quisites for the other 2 (e.g. recall Sentient Algo. example above). Now I can decide which of the 5 APPLICATIONS to research, and how much RPs to allocate to each. I can either research one of them at a time, or a number of them simultaneously.

Now why would I want to research more than one APPLICATION at a time? While it may be apparent in the case of FIELD, since the player cannot be sure when a certain APPLICATION will become available, this is not the case of APPLICATION. Well, a player will be encouraged to do so via 3 main methods, Interest, Diminishing Returns, and Roadblocks.

Interest refers to the fact that player gains a bonus in researching any particular technology depending on the amount of RPs already spent and the duration of research (more RPs and longer time yields more interest.) This applies not only to APPLCIATIONS, but THEORETICAL FIELDS too, although slightly different in formulas (making constant adjustment a less attractive idea, thus promoting long-term planning)

There is also an "inertial" stage when a tech is just being funded, usually in the beginning. At this time, a negative interest (in %) is actually earned, which fade away as time passes. This is used to represent the effort of getting things started. Obviously then, the constantly one-tech-at-a-time approach would suffer quiet significantly in the long run in this case.

The method of Diminishing Returns is probably familiar to you, basically, there exist some optimal level of funding that is most efficient. Beyond that level you get less and less research benefit for the funding you put in, similarly for under-funding (you can even lose progress, although not already researched technology).

Lastly, Roadblocks. As mentioned above, an APPLICATION appears if and only if all its Primary pre-requisites are met. An APPLICATION is RESEARCHABLE, if and only if all of its pre-requisites, as determined in the beginning of the game, are met. In other words, as soon as all bare requirements are met, you can research the invention. However, you run the risk of Roadblocks.

When researching any APPLICATION, there is always the threat of Roadblocks. The amount of risk decreases as one's relative FIELD level relative to the pre-quisites increases. The risk reduction is more significant for every higher FIELD level in the same FIELD as the Primary pre-quisites of the APPLICATION in question, and less so if otherwise. Consequently, start researching an APPLICATION as soon as it is available, and put all RPs into this single APPLICATION, can be very risky to say the least. (Faction profiles may increase or reduce the overall risk)

So what is a Roadblock? Well, this means your research effort has come to a trouble spot, or stagnations. The project has not failed, but it isn't proceeding much either yet. All fundings in this APPLICATION will have little effect, although decrease in funding may lead to progress drop. There are two possible outcomes to encountering a Roadblock. The duration in which either of the outcomes will occur is random, but generally not too long (1~10 turns perhaps)
1) After a certain time, you may eventually pass the bottleneck, and the research will continue as normal (i.e. normal progress increase). You may even complete the research right away (if you are lucky ^_^)
2) Your research came to a complete dead end, i.e. it failed. This means you need to re-start researching this APPLICATION from scratch, that is 0% completion status, (although you do gain %RP bonus for this APPLICATION for RPs put in it henceforth)

Roadblocks are indeed troublesome, yet encountering them isn't the end of the world. There are also some beneficial side effects to a roadblock that may occur. I.e., when you finally got through the bottleneck or have failed, your scientists may gain some insights from their effort/failure. This could be in the forms of:
1) a sudden increase in the completion status of the APPLICATION in question
2) perhaps it might be an increase in some FIELD level standing (or their progress status)
3) A small number of extra Research Points become available for the next few turns
4) etc.

Note, Roadblocks can also happen to THEORETICAL FIELD researches, although the chance of encountering is low, and the probability of complete failure is much rarer while the possible occurrence of beneficial side effects (those that are applicable) are more frequent.

----------------------------------------
Some other notes on numbers and tech cost.

I did not like Civ's model of tech cost, where the cost of a technology is dependent on the number of tech you already have. while it was like that for play-balance reason, I really did not like it.

Instead, I think the BASE COST for APPLICATION should depend on its pre-quisites, basically making higher level technology more costly; while the ACTUAL COST is also affected by some random factors determined in the beginning of the game, as well as relative Field standings (making lower tech a lot cheaper to research). When researching, the player should never been given the value of the COST, but instead is informed of an estimate of the number of turns that may be needed, based on the funding level. This estimate is not to be always accurate, but whose accuracy increases but the relative FIELD level between player's faction's level standings and that of the APPLICATION.

Quote:

For example, say the ACTUAL COST of an APPLICATION is 2000, and I dedicate 200 RPs to the project each turn.

If my FIELD level is the same as the tech pre-quisites, the estimate may be as low as 5 turns, or as high as 20 turns.

However, if my FIELD level is a bit higher (which would reduce the ACTUAL COST a bit, but let's not worry about that part yet), the estimate improves and may be from 8 up to 14 turns.

Similar system would also work for THEORETICAL FIELDS, except there won't have anything resemble relative FIELD standings, but the estimate error range may be even higher.

----------------------------------------

Gateway103 · January 25, 2003, 21:23

Gateway's Crazy Idea, Part 3

Conclusion

The above is a simple overview of the research model I prefer. I realize it may sound quiet complex and perhaps confusing, thanks to my semi-coherent writing, I must note that most of the mechanics are "under the hood," i.e. the players won't see.

From a player's perspective, he/she will know only a few things:
1) The tech tree vary from time to time, there is no one golden path that would always work, as the pre-quisites may change from time to time. This makes the game more repayable.
2) It is not beneficial to rush funding a research project, unless it is absolutely necessary. Putting all the eggs in one basket can have serious consequences should a roadblock occurs.
3) Do not trust the estimates I see on the research screen whole heartedly. They are there to give me some idea of the time the research may take, but are by no mean necessarily accurate, not to mention roadblocks can in principle occur at the final step towards completion.
4) The Research Model is kind of like blind research when it comes to THEORETICAL FIELD and when any given APPLICATION may pop up. However, I do have control over the specific APPLICATION I want to research.

Now there are some ideas I am toying:
1) Technology Shock idea (originally conceived for MOO3, but was not implemented).

Tech Shock is a feature intended to keep technology research on a smooth pace, rather than the crazy 1-tech-discovery-per-turn frenzy (or even 2 or 3 tech!) that can plague the game (e.g. SMAC/X, Civ2). Basically, the concept is that the society cannot cope/deal with all these new inventions should they arrive too quickly (ethical/moral acceptance, adjustment of world views, etc). As such, should a myriad number of new technology come popping up in a short time, there will be social backlashes. Of course, the danger of tech shock would also depend on the kinds of technology invented. Frontier researches are more likely to scare people than the wheels

Other games, like Civilization 3, attempts to maintain a smooth tech-research path by setting a minimum number of turns restriction between inventions. Tech Shock can be thought of as a incentive rather than a restriction, compare to Civ3's method.

2) Complete blind research option

This shouldn't be too difficult to code. It can be done simply by not allowing the players to adjust the funding level for specific APPLICATION, and allocate RPs for APPLICATION category evenly among all available APPLICATIONS. The player can, of course, still view the estimated progress, as well as click on the tech to see a description of it. This way the same GUI will still be usable, no need to change it. This would, of course, be a game setup option.

3) Adaptive Blind research option, or Need-Driven model

This is conceivable much harder to design and may even frustrate players. Nevertheless, the idea is that while the player still retain control over allocation of RPs among various FIELDS and the category of APPLICATION as a whole, the funding level of individual APPLICATION are not even as was in Complete blind research model. The actual funding level of each individual APPLICATION invention is influenced by allocation to each FIELD, as well as the need of the society. Moreover, players aren't allowed to see the individual funding level of APPLICATION inventions, except its description, and maybe progress estimation.

For example, if the society is involved in an offensive war, offensive military technology may be given priorities (but a major defeat may shift the focus to defensive capabilities). However, when a society is at peace, planet development technology will be given priorities. Now the transition isn't a sharp, but gradual one. Other factors that may influence funding are governmental policies, diplomatic relations, faction profiles, planet conditions, plan randomness, and etc.

This research model may perhaps more "realistic," but significantly harder to design and balance. In addition, it may lessen player's fun but taking away the control. However, this model can provide very interesting gaming.

----------------------------------------
Just another of my incessant babbling... ^_^

For some information on the inspiration for the above model (i.e. the original, not the final, moo3 model), follow the link below.
http://moo3.quicksilver.com/official/tech01.html

-Gateway103

Jeremy Buloch · January 25, 2003, 21:24

Gateway Ras isn't the Moderator Blake is so good luck in getting it deleted. I haven't heard a word from Blake in awhile.

Gateway delete all of the post and put "/me" needs a moderator to delete this post.
-J.B.-

Gateway103 · January 25, 2003, 21:28

JB... well, at least the above editing method can save me some embrassement

-Gateway103

Jeremy Buloch · January 25, 2003, 22:49

np Gateway, it has happened to me before.

-J.B.-

Mark123jansen · January 26, 2003, 06:17

who cares about the double posting, your techmodel is BRILJANT!! thumbs up!

DeathByTheSword · January 26, 2003, 10:39

wow i will read this soon....

Gateway103 · January 26, 2003, 15:25

Why thank you kindly Mark123jansen ^_^

Although I can't take the credit. I simply "borrow" the original MOO3 Model, altered it and expanded slightly. ^_^

-Gateway103

targon · January 27, 2003, 04:16

!!!!!!!!!!!!
IMHO, this model is 200% closer to real science progress than any other tech model I know of! Of course, you need both previous achievments and theoretical background! And, don't forget breakthroughs, science sometimes does great leaps due to some bad-known reasons.

Jeremy Buloch · January 27, 2003, 15:39

Shall we call it the "Gateway" model then?

I like it, just give me some time to compile some feedback.

-J.B.-

Jeremy Buloch · January 30, 2003, 22:20

The only Comment is that its GREAT!

-J.B.-

Michiel · January 31, 2003, 10:30

I just had time to read it now. Sounds brilliant! But I have some questions.

As I understand it roadblocks can occur with an application when you have only just met the pre-requisites. Roadblocks are less likely when you have a couple more theoratical lvls then the pre-requisites specify. Right?

Is it possible to break through the roadblock by increasing the research for the pre-requisite theoratical fields WHILE you are in a roadblock? Maybe you gain a lvl that can break you through? Or something?

And if there are also roadblocks with theoratical research, how are they influenced? By other theoratical lvls? Or are they just totally random?

And about the tech-shock. While it's an interesting idea, I'm against it. The best part of the game would for me be to research as much as possible as fast as possible. How long will one game last if you have a 1000 things to research and some tech shock-danger is slowing you down? It would take away some of the fun for me. Except if it's a 'mild' shock. One that you can compensate for with ... something. Maybe you can spend some resources by putting the people at ease, inform them slowly. Or maybe to keep the entire research a secret to the public. (which, if discovered, can make you less trustworthy to your people). Something like that. BTW, please explain how 'crazy 1-tech-discovery-per-turn frenzies' can plague the game.

Quote:

From a player's perspective, he/she will know only a few things:
1) The tech tree vary from time to time, there is no one golden path that would always work, as the pre-quisites may change from time to time. This makes the game more repayable.
2) It is not beneficial to rush funding a research project, unless it is absolutely necessary. Putting all the eggs in one basket can have serious consequences should a roadblock occurs.
3) Do not trust the estimates I see on the research screen whole heartedly. They are there to give me some idea of the time the research may take, but are by no mean necessarily accurate, not to mention roadblocks can in principle occur at the final step towards completion.
4) The Research Model is kind of like blind research when it comes to THEORETICAL FIELD and when any given APPLICATION may pop up. However, I do have control over the specific APPLICATION I want to research.

This is a very complex research-method. I think the player should be able to see more of what's happening if he/she wants.

Great work, btw.

Gateway103 · January 31, 2003, 11:32

Michiel, concerning Roadblocks for Application. Yes, if you made advance in Theoretical Researches, it may indeed help you break the Roadblocks, this can be done via a die roll or two, with a higher chance for success.

As to Roadblocks for Theories, they are mostly random, but less frequent than Roadblocks for Applications, and generally have higher chance of yielding benenficial side-effects.

Regarding Tech-Shock, well, like I said, it is an idea I'm toying with. I realize that this can be frustrating to techophiles (e.g. me), although it may just be interesting enough to make me think about it.

Why is the crazy-one-tech-per-turn plaguing the game? In SP, I suppose it doesn't really matter if the player is happy with it. In MP though, this will likely occur only for the dominant faction(s), and they will get more and more powerful, pretty much denying all chance of the lesser deveoped factions from catching on. But that's just a thought, perhaps the richer get richer is the way of reality, albeit perhaps not the most interesting/fun one.

As for being slowed down by tech shock and not being able to research everything... Well, I would hope the tech reservoir is deep enough that unless someone is obsessed with tech research, he/she/it will most likely not have researched/traded for every tech during any given game. Instead, he/she/it may have to specialize on one or two Fields. This would encourage replayability, if just for the "discovering-new-tech feeling". But that's just me.

-Gateway103

DeathByTheSword · January 31, 2003, 11:50

w00t finally read gateways proposal.........me liking it!