Multiple RC Penalty to Tech Advancement

[EternusIV]

On topic:

 

1) I'm involved with a SMALL group of players and have a couple of empires to see tech development. Beyond that, I simply visit here and spout off my findings for free and leech by the graces of others who post and comment.

I agree with WKE on this point and don't think publishing the tech tree would be fair to the groups that have worked hard in putting their trees together.

 

2) Of the various branches I've seen, I don't see one dominating, must-have tech path that fits every empire's needs. I'm impressed with the tech diversity so far and its super cool to se see people branching off in different directions. Even if I knew how to get to certain tech items, I can already tell that I won't have the time to visit them all. Kudos to RTG for that.

 

3) I have an approximaiton on the dimishing returns formula. It would be nice to see an official formula. However, I'm not convinced there is a single linear equation for diminishing returns. I think the diminshing returns penalty is also a function of the level of technology that is being researched with more than one center. Who knows? Its not a prime concern, really. Nice to know for me -- but won't change my directions very much.

 

4) I like the mystery of the tech tree, too.

 

 

 

Dyson Sphere

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

Freeman Dyson must be a very famous fellow in the SNROTE universe

 

Hats off to RTG for recognizing a brilliant man and his idea.

 

Here is alink to a pretty thorough discussion of the Dyson Sphere with the basic science and theory behind it.

 

http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/dysonFAQ.html

 

Enjoy!

[PhaseDragon]

I say post the tech trees...how could it hurt? Of course, I can see the benefit of posting the tech tree for engines and jump drives....quicker contact. The benefit of posting the tech tree towards better mines/industries might be a negative one, but it would make the other players in the game much happier and more likely to keep playing. The game costs money....a lot of money to some. It is tough to rationalize the expense to find out that in a year your empire is so far behind that you have no hope of catching up. That would be a dropped empire for most people....and possibly a switch to some other game such as Master Of Orion. I for one love this game and have loved it since the days of StarMaster in the 1980's. I only regret not hearing about the game at the beginning of the new startup so I could enjoy the tech that everyone is talking about. I only have the basic stuff with only 3 new discoveries since I spent all my race points on my lifeform. Very foolish in hindsight I suppose. I would definitely save points on any future race. I am already feeling way behind. The whole saved points in my opinion is the real fault of the game. Anyone who saved points is light years ahead of anyone who didn't save points and will probably be ahead for the entire game. I think that if you didn't want to use all your race points that you should get some other bonus than "free" technology. This seems like too much of an advantage. Just my opinion of course, although I suspect that anyone who spent all of their points as well would agree with me.

[Cargus10]

While I agree that saved points are a bit too good, I am one of those that spent virtually all their points (I saved enough to get maybe 3 Slot 1 techs) and I'm not all that upset. The race is fun, and flavorful, and my R&D bonus will amonut to something at some point. Those 5th Generation and up techs will make you feel a real liking for any R&D bonus your lifeform has, I think!

 

I kind of like the slow TL pace. For once, I don't have to worry about having ships that are obsolete before I can build them, unlike many games I could mention in this genre.

[Locklyn]

Nope, the only worry us nerdy science races will have is those bully races on steroids (read SRPs) that have put all tech into advanced weaponry and will massacre us in a space fight, hence all nerdy science races, build LOTS of ships and weapons so as to survive untill your RB bonus really kicks in

 

/Locklyn

[Ixitixl]

Funny you should say that Locklyn, as a matter of fact I spent the majority of my points, and let myself with 12 points...

 

Not regretting it, too bad I did not give myself a decent research bonus. But judging by the length of the bar for Close Combat Modifier, I believe that the Mantodeans can "request" lunch money from the Gremloids without any problems.

[Azuth]

But judging by the length of the bar for Close Combat Modifier, I believe that the Mantodeans can "request" lunch money from the Gremloids without any problems.

 

Try that tactic with the Drow and we'll have YOU for lunch. Though I don't think you'd be as tasty as the Gremloids. :lol:

[MadMartinB]

The toughest race is probably the Amani. You can make plants tougher than about anything else :-)

 

even get the double jaw benefit

 

[Hiver]

.

It certainly is nice to see the lively debate that this post caused...

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

 

However, I think a couple of people might be missing the point. The question wasn't about speeding up tech research in any way. (I'm actually very happy with the pace of tech advance.) It was meant to specifically address the (as some people have commented) - heavy - research penalty incurred by assigning more than one research center to a researchable technology.

 

I also don't think some races realize just how heavy the penalty is, especially in combination with the bonuses some races get for saving up initial race development points. (Perhaps they began by assigning one RC per tech, and came out just fine.) But it really is a huge disadvantage if you mis-assign your RCs.

 

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

 

To illustrate the depth of this situation, let me "bear my soul" to the masses, so to speak. When I began this game (Oct 2002), I did realize that there was an unknown amount of penalty to assigning more than one RC to a tech. But I thought that such a penalty would certainly be fairly small, so as not to be too unbalancing to the game. So, armed with a large research bonus from spending ALL of my development points, I decided to go after ship advances with a vengance. I assigned 5-10 RC's on each advance, to ensure I got them as quickly as possible, hoping that would give me an edge. I did get all of my second-gen ship techs fairly quickly (though not quite as quickly as I had hoped), and after a few months into the game, I felt pretty good about my race's technological prowess.

 

Good that is, until around Turn 10, when I began reading posts on this board about tech advances that were far beyond mine. In ten turns, I had only 12 tech advances. The average person on this board at that time had 22 of them - nearly DOUBLE the number I had. To make matters worse, I had been counting RPs spent, and I had paid up to 50 points to get some of the advances. My jaw dropped. Now granted, ship advances are tougher to get than other kinds of advances, but that still seemed like a HUGE disadvantage to me at the time. I had spent five times the number of research points as anyone else and only got half as far along on the tech tree. That's what I call a heavy penalty. And I'm sure I'm not alone in this - others have suffered similar penalties (and there are probably others - non-board readers, probably - who are STILL suffering this penalty.)

 

I just thank my lucky stars that:

 

(1) I scour this board for info on a very frequent basis;

(2) Because I do, I saw the error of my strategy soon enough that I could fix it;

(3) I chose to play a high research bonus race, so I was able to eventually catch

up with the average (non or low-research bonus) player;

(4) I have a long history with the Supernova series of games and am one of it's

most loyal and fervent fans.

 

- otherwise this one issue might have caused me to drop my position.

 

But, circumstances being as they are, I answered this poll "I wish I knew how

heavy the penalties were - I'm still trying to catch up."

 

I really do love this game and think that Pete and Russ are doing a great job of making the game better and better every day, but I'd like to say - Hey guys, this one really hurt.

.

[hobknob]

Ouch...... nothing is worth more than a few RC's unless the enemy is knocking on the door.

 

[hobknob]

On reflection, I am not too irritated by the heavy cost or penalty for using multiple RC's. If there weren't a penalty then tech would rule and knowing what the propper path is to a given tech would be the biggest deal in the game. Without a hefty penalty many players would either be tempted or forced to pursue a very 1 dimensional research track. This in turn would make most players follow suit just out of self preservation. It has been said that a Mk III weapon is so far ahead of a Mk I weapon to make the Mk I's about useless. Without a hefty research penalty the game would devolve into the first best shot approach of SNII. Since that is not the desired effect the penalty helps to level that out. Now I know, and am comfortable with the idea, that a potential enemy may have a weapon or two or three that exceeds my own, but I will likely have many weapons and defensive systems to counter his/her one or two more advanced systems.

 

[woolfe99]

From what I've seen, it appears there could be 1300+ total techs on the ladder. Then again, I could be way off. There could be 2000+.

 

According to my rough calculations, any race that starts up in the first year (between the begining of the game and now), should grab between 100 and 300 techs by game's end. Where you fall in that range will depend heavily on 1) SRP's, 2) RB, 3) tech strategy of researching laterally for more lower level advances vs. vertically for fewer higher level advances, and 4) tendency to use or not use multiple RC's per tech. In only very rare, extreme scenarios could I see anyone ending up above or below that range.

 

It raises an interesting dilemma for those who enjoy the tech aspect of 3X games more than anything else. If you really want to be able to explore the tech tree, you'd have to run multiple empires. I wonder if that is intentional? Anyway, this game is vastly different from other 3X games (including comp games like MOO). I've never seen a 3X game where you couldn't acquire at least a third of all available tech by game's end. In many, you can approach or achieve 100%. This isn't a criticism, just an observation.

[Kurassier]

According to my rough calculations, any race that starts up in the first year (between the begining of the game and now), should grab between 100 and 300 techs by game's end.

 

Who said anything about the game ending?

 

The Sabeli do not plan on ever going away!!!

 

(too many people depend on our beer ships)

[Locklyn]

I think that there are some fundamental flaws in how tech is handled today and an overcautious fear of it unbalancing the game while making it so hard and slow it is gruesome now especially for those without SRPs.

 

It is a mystery to me why we cannot trade tech know how, sure it could get out of hand with an elder-younger race boost but instead of making it impossible why not just make it hard? Ie for example:

 

* Tech Trade could only happen on a world where both Empires have built a certain installation and have a Master Scientist or such stationed? Could be an expensive science complex or such

* You could trade 1 tech max per turn

* You could only trade techs that you have the prereq techs for, so as to prevent quick uplifting of a species by giving them the Mk VII Reality Ripper.

 

This would give much more incentive for trade and peaceful contact than trading weaponry and defensive parts for ships, which you only could do with someone you trusted completely or you would actually be telling the other guy exactly what paths you'd been going down and leaving yourself wide open.

 

Also I think there actually should be some sort of research bonus from building science colonies or other types of colonies outside your homesystem and placing scientists there, wow an alien system, a completly alien world, your scientific community would be wetting their pants while researching razor wire!

 

Research is sooo slow, scientist breaktrhoughs far between and if you have explored anything, you will be getting 6th gen stuff hits and such wich isn't that much use right now...

 

Pete has defended the slowness of research time and time again with that this is a long time game, 5-10 years in scope, but my question is, is RTG guaranteeing that the game will still be run in that time if a majority of players drop after the first years finding it slow or such?

 

I have played more than a year now and still have to find someone excepting neutrals in my region of space and though I have learned quite a lot about Excel I would have tired a long time ago of "playing with myself" if it hadn't been for the GSL guys and that runs true for many many players...without the rapport or interaction behind these boards in the various alliances I believe this game would have far less players than it has now.

 

I'm not thrashing anyone or the game, but I am worried where this will go and what will happen if not the game turns more "fun" and action packed. I spend about 48 dollars a month on the game on my position and hence want to believe that I will get a return on that money in form of fun turns with excitement and the recent excellent changes in EXPL are a step in that direction and with more of the vagueness of the rules and combat and such slowly dissappating frustration lessens also and leads to this being the excellent game it has all the promise of...

 

Now...where is my turn

/Locklyn

[EternusIV]

Well.....

 

the tech Tree is huge.

 

I think the initial fear is:

 

"OMG those with SRPs will have Improvied ICs, Advanced Weaponry, Mk III Defenses, Super Drones, NTWDs, Industrial Sciences, Species Bonuses, Superior Engines and Everything else before I finish all my 2nd generation stuff!!!"

 

Nuh-uh

 

Dont work that way

 

You CANT do it all

 

I stand by my previous opinion despite the brilliant counterarguments I received:

 

The slower research pace and the diverse tree will create diversity and a more entertaining game.

 

It forces us to make choices.

 

One thing I LOVE about this game is that we will never have any "cookie cutter" empires out there.

[WKE235]

Well, you may not be able to do it all. But, with saved SRP's and enough knowledge of what to research, you can do enough to have a real advantage over others with no saved SRP or not enough knowledge of the tree.

 

For example, I have two races. One started on the very first runs of this game. The other around 12 or so turns later. The younger race has achieved 2nd and 3rd generation Industrial Science, MK III Jump Survey Sensors, just completed the needed requirements to open up Nuclear Transwarp Drive, and, is only a turn or two away from getting Improved Industrial complexes. I've already been stockpiling items to build the IIC's. While it will take a little time to convert to the new IIC's, I will be able to almost triple my overall economic output by the time I'm done. And with slow research completing over time on ship weapons, I will have a significant advantage over any of the other races near my younger race.

 

The older race ... Pttffff ... very little in SRP so it will be some time they get to the same point, despite having around twice as many turns in now.

 

In addition, while most races will not be cookie cutter, there ARE a lot of base needed similarities. Jump Survey Sensors, NTWD, better engines, improved materials, new horizon techs ... enough similarties that the differences researched will not make as much of a difference as you may think.