Cha0zz wrote:

Scytale wrote:I could be convinced of this if the increased cost over time did not fully cancel the gain from the mining technology. I do not want a full zero-sum game, even in the long term.

So you want to be able to research technologies that will never become obsolete? You want that your horse still has advantages compared to a car, even if the car is more expensive?

No, I meant the other way round. I want the car to be advantageous to a horse even though it may be more expensive to produce. Interestingly in today's world, owning a horse is a far greater sign of wealth than owning a car.

It seems to me - and correct me if I'm wrong - that Cornflakes wants the car to be better than the horse in the short term, but when other technologies catch up then it's as useful to the new, modern economy as the horse was to the old one. I see this as profoundly pointless, personally, and does not reflect reality.

Scytale wrote:and does not reflect reality.

which reality?

trucks and delivery vans fill the exact same purpose which horse cargo carriages filled.
tractors replaced plough horses
sports cars replaced the fast, overbred racing horses as status symbols
etc.

cars are the modern horses.

almost point by point.

they are as useful to the new, hightech society as horses were to the lowtech society.

So, really, the industrial revolution did not change society's capability to produce things? Planes, trains and automobiles didn't increase net efficiency of their filled tasks over the long term?

Cornflakes_91 wrote:

Scytale wrote:and does not reflect reality.

which reality?

trucks and delivery vans fill the exact same purpose which horse cargo carriages filled.
tractors replaced plough horses
sports cars replaced the fast, overbred racing horses as status symbols
etc.

cars are the modern horses.

almost point by point.

they are as useful to the new, hightech society as horses were to the lowtech society.

Fortunately you don't have to clean up after your car, feed it daily, and give it water (and time to rest) every so many miles because you have been using it all day. A car is superior to a horse. Now, lets try to work together and find a solution that we can all agree with.

Sling shot < Bow and arrow < rifle < machine gun

Is this a problem? I don't think so. It's a question of resources, research, and competition. A lesser tech civilization can always steal or trade for the advanced tech to be able to use it. Limit Theory will have ways to get around enemies with a tech advantage. I trust the AI will keep other AI in check as the universe expands during universe generation. If for some reason one society is isolated from the rest then they will eventually get concord or do something brilliant to continue their way of life.

Does that make sense?

Scytale wrote:So, really, the industrial revolution did not change society's capability to produce things? Planes, trains and automobiles didn't increase net efficiency of their filled tasks over the long term?

and building a train line including trains doesnt need orders of magnitudes more resources than to breed a horse?


according to wikipedia a ford T was completed in around 93 minutes, today the same process takes according to various internet sources around 18 hours.


we may produce more "stuff" but we also need more of that stuff to create productive equipment.

Cornflakes_91 wrote:

Scytale wrote:So, really, the industrial revolution did not change society's capability to produce things? Planes, trains and automobiles didn't increase net efficiency of their filled tasks over the long term?

and building a train line including trains doesnt need orders of magnitudes more resources than to breed a horse?


according to wikipedia a ford T was completed in around 93 minutes, today the same process takes according to various internet sources around 18 hours.


we may produce more "stuff" but we also need more of that stuff to create productive equipment.

Of course, Cornflakes, but in response I repeat what I said before:

I could be convinced of this if the increased cost over time did not fully cancel the gain from the mining technology. I do not want a full zero-sum game, even in the long term.

Scytale wrote: I could be convinced of this if the increased cost over time did not fully cancel the gain from the mining technology. I do not want a full zero-sum game, even in the long term.

and before that i already proposed a solution :

combine the both shemes

infinite self-canceling progression with a balance shift following diminishing returns.


you are never at a point where research gets absolutely pointless (like your sheme would create) and you can still get some "progress" (like mine did kinda forbid)

Ok, I could buy that, but I do want to see actual progress. It depends on the details of the implementation, I suppose.

i'd just like to bring McDuffs post from earlier this thread back to mind.

because that would to much to preserve a somewhat "level" playing field for players of the same civilisation.

Cornflakes_91 wrote:i'd just like to bring McDuffs post from earlier this thread back to mind.

because that would to much to preserve a somewhat "level" playing field for players of the same civilization.

I like that idea. I'd only make one change to it, being that instead of everyone getting bumped up automatically after a period of time, the technology is reverse engineered by the AI. Reverse engineering should only occur if the technology is stolen, retrieved from a destroyed vessel containing the tech, or purchased from the original producer of the technology.

Monopolies on advanced technology should be possible yet difficult to maintain if the product is being purchased by others.

BFett wrote: I like that idea. I'd only make one change to it, being that instead of everyone getting bumped up automatically after a period of time, the technology is reverse engineered by the AI. Reverse engineering should only occur if the technology is stolen, retrieved from a destroyed vessel containing the tech, or purchased from the original producer of the technology.

Monopolies on advanced technology should be possible yet difficult to maintain if the product is being purchased by others.

There is no explicit technology to steal or reverse engineer.

Think of intels finFET technology, everyone knows about that and how it roughly works and how to build it.

How the processors are actually built and how to use the finfets most efficiently is intels secret, that is their engineering and not the fundamental research.

The fundamental research is public, the special engineering is private

Man, I wish McDuff would post a bit more these days, that guy had some good ideas

Cornflakes_91 wrote: There is no explicit technology to steal or reverse engineer.

Think of intels finFET technology, everyone knows about that and how it roughly works and how to build it.

How the processors are actually built and how to use the finfets most efficiently is intels secret, that is their engineering and not the fundamental research.

The fundamental research is public, the special engineering is private

Well, it's probably the case for a small planet like Earth or a small solar system, but for the universe where transmissions are limited by spped of light, it's not obvious.

davdav wrote:

Cornflakes_91 wrote: There is no explicit technology to steal or reverse engineer.

Think of intels finFET technology, everyone knows about that and how it roughly works and how to build it.

How the processors are actually built and how to use the finfets most efficiently is intels secret, that is their engineering and not the fundamental research.

The fundamental research is public, the special engineering is private

Well, it's probably the case for a small planet like Earth or a small solar system, but for the universe where transmissions are limited by spped of light, it's not obvious.

Are they limited by the speed of light in LT? I would say no.

davdav wrote: Well, it's probably the case for a small planet like Earth or a small solar system, but for the universe where transmissions are limited by spped of light, it's not obvious.

So you object to interstellar travel and to rts/4x gameplay over multiple systems in LT?


the lightspeed barrier is in lt just like the sound barrier today, annoying, but not impossible to cross/work around.

I guess its also pretty accepted canon that there will be some kind of informational infrastructure in LT, enabling cheap interstellar communications for short to medium interstellar ranges.