tech question/suggestion

Well, I think you have missed a small point: laser 3 take less space than laser 1. So instead of having laser 1 taking less space, you have a new laser that is taking less space. I guess it is that way to avoid any strange effect in ships design.

You can take an analogy with computers: it is not because we have pentium IV that 386 chips take less space It is the new generation of chips that take less space. The space used by old generation chips haven't changed since their design is fixed .

Citizen sendeth is right, sort of.

Looking at your computer analogy, if you built a 386 today you would fit many many more chips on a wafer.
So you have the same fixed design (386) yet with new manufacturing (a die shrink) you get a much smaller package and therefore cheaper per unit.. It would also run much cooler than the originals as a bonus.

So new manufacturing with an old design could make the product cheaper and smaller
Now I don't know how that would translate to futuristic lasers...

I'll agree that that would make sense, but only if Laser 3 were more effective than Laser 2. It isn't, it's just smaller and/or cheaper. In most cases, later versions of the same line have the same effectiveness, so the later version is the "Improved 386", it's the Plasma weapons that would represent the 486.

In most cases, later versions of the same line have the same effectiveness, so the later version is the "Improved 386", it's the Plasma weapons that would represent the 486.

That is my point.

i think when u improve on a tech it should flat out replace the old tech. example laser 3 is invented so u can no longer build laser 2 because laser 3 is or should be better in everyway.

Sorry Peace Phoenix, I shouldn't be posting pre-caffine.

delta leader: I think I'd like you to clarify that. Do you mean within a line, or across lines. In other words, should Hyperwarp I obsolete Warp V, and (seperate question) should it be better in every way?

If the answer to either of these are yes, then I have to disagree. I don't mind the idea of a line being a continuous improvement, with no steps backwards, but there should be a step backward at the start of new technologies, and to me that means that the tech at the start of a generation shouldn't obsolete the previous generation automatically.

sometimes i have like 4 slots left and i would like to fill it in. too small for shields life support, and espcially any weapon. even though i have a 3rd or 4th tier weapon that takes up 8 slots, and the outdated tech isn't streamlined or improved at all. but that's not the point. in the 70's we built computers that took up a whole room and used punch cards. now that we can build cellphones with more power than one of the original computers, we don't still use an entire room to build a pc now because we have improved on what previously built. maybe texas instrument will bring back the slide rule and put it right next to the graphing calculaters. this is like the 386/486 argument. if we built a new 386 today it would be far superior to the old 386.

as for making previous designs obsolete, it is my game. if i want to build a useless cargo ship with 20 laser 1's, i should be able to do it. in fact i built a ship called an ODP (orbital defense platform) and it has nothing but shields and weapons, because it only stays in orbit to help defend a planet. this combined with defense system, you get a very fortified planet very quickly.

do you see what i am saying???

if we built a new 386 today it would be far superior to the old 386.

Sure, but if you need some research to build a new 386 today, then this means it isn't the same than the old 386. Using the old 386 means that you are using the blue prints and the techonology used at its time. If you are trying to use the new techs to build a 386, then you are doing a research in the 386 tech path.

Not sure if I am clear, but that is my point.
Old 386 <-> laser 1
New 386 <-> laser 5 : more effecient, use less space, but you need to put some research to benefits from the latest advances.

i still would like to have a lower power class laser that is smaller and cheaper. what if i want to build a small fighter and it doesn;t look right with one laser 4, and so i want to put 2 laser 1's on each wing because it is aesthetically pleasing. it shouldn't be a big deal to make a smaller laser available that is cheaper and weaker as long as it is purportional to it's class (1,2,3,4, whatever). the same with the mass drivers and missles, also. they are all so big you can put maybe 3 weapons on them. and lasers are as big as missle components??? c'mon. it even says the lasers advantage is that it is so small that you can put more of them on. but you are better off just going with mass drivers. even after you complete miniturization, you can only add a couple shields, life support and maybe 3 weapons. more like 2, but it depends on what you pick.

I kinda like the idea of making 'obsolete' techs cheaper, but to make them smaller, you'll need a more robust scale for abilities. Right now weapons seem to have three values: Damage, Cost, Size. That doesn't give much lateral growth for weapons. They just progress in a straight line.

The description for Lasers says it's a 'long range' weapon, I think, but range isn't a factor I've seen yet. If you added "Range" and "Refire" you could make 'higher' tech items have better range, but equal damage, or faster refire rates, and cost more.

Ex: Then you could slap 5 Laser 1's into a fighter, since they're tiny weak lasers with a size of three... but they do 1 damage at short range and fire slowly.

I'm not sure how hard that would be to program into the game, given the current combat model and mechanics. It might well be impossible, but it's a nice thought.

all i'm saying is that the size to weapon ratio is backwards. older tech is always smaller and cheaper. look at the ps1 and the remade mini. the mini ps1 still works the same, but runs smoother, is half the size, and costs half as much. THAT is how it works. not like on the game. the game is backwards.

as for changing it in the game, there is probably a file with the size value in it, but i haven't looked.

yet.

older tech is always smaller and cheaper. look at the ps1 and the remade mini. the mini ps1 still works the same, but runs smoother, is half the size, and costs half as much. THAT is how it works.

Well, I don't see you point: "PS 1" is the equivalent of "laser 1" and "mini ps 1" is the equivalent of "laser 2". It may be an old conception, but done with newer components. BUT you need to have spend some time/money to create the new version, even it is nothing revolutionnary and in the same technology line.

btw, anyone else laugh at the mention of 'Mitrosoft' and derivative products.. forget what tech that is. I sure giggled when I read it.. think it fits here.

you can believe whatever you want, but it is always new tech that is bulkier and more expensive to make. look at cell phones, cars, computers, even military weapons like the lasers and microwave weapons they are putting on some hummers. older tech should never be tougher to build (in a compact design).

but it is always new tech that is bulkier and more expensive to make

The first incarantion of the tech, yes. But look at the laptop now and how they were 10 years ago. You always need research to have a more compact design

older tech should never be tougher to build (in a compact design).

Sorry, I have a problem with this: older tech uses older components. It is refinement of older techs with newer components that allows them be more compact. It is sometimes the basis behind that the tech that limit the minimum possible size: steam powered engine aren't more compact than oil based engine.

yes, and we still make laptops AND pc's because they have different uses. you don't lug a pc around when you only need a laptop. you don't go get a laptop when you need a calculator.

your arguement would make more sense if the older techs were made obsolete after a new tech is developped. but they are still available.

and once again, NEWER TECH SHOULD ALWAYS BE LARGER AND TOUGHER TO BUILD. wow, we move from a crt screen to a plasma, but the plasma is easier to build and is cheaper. wait, that's not how it is.

if you want new tech to be easier to build and cheaper and always smaller, then we need different classes of lasers. i go to make a very fast very long range scout, but i want just a small laser on it in case it has to fight a fighter, but i load it up on shields and life support and go to put a small crappy laser on it, and wow, my great civilization can make a death ray, but can't make a laser pointer any smaller than a house.

yes, and we still make laptops AND pc's because they have different uses.

Well, I didn't compare laptop and PC: I did compare today laptop and 10 years ago laptop.

your arguement would make more sense if the older techs were made obsolete after a new tech is developped. but they are still available.

Well, they are available but this doesn't mean that new researches are made to improve them

and once again, NEWER TECH SHOULD ALWAYS BE LARGER AND TOUGHER TO BUILD. wow, we move from a crt screen to a plasma, but the plasma is easier to build and is cheaper. wait, that's not how it is.

I guess the problem is the definition of "newer tech". If you are meaning something based on a new concept, than it is the case in Galciv II. For example, Warp Drive take more space than impulse drive mark III. But the various Mark techs correspond to refinement of existing technology to make it smaller.

if you want new tech to be easier to build and cheaper and always smaller, then we need different classes of lasers. i go to make a very fast very long range scout, but i want just a small laser on it in case it has to fight a fighter, but i load it up on shields and life support and go to put a small crappy laser on it, and wow, my great civilization can make a death ray, but can't make a laser pointer any smaller than a house.

After having completed tech "laser V", your scientists have decided that no further improvements could be made on the laser technology. If that annoys you, you should give them new way of research (ie mod the game an create XML files with the weapon characteristics you want).

BTW, when you have researched death ray, I am pretty that the whole galaxy have some nice defense for their ships, meaning that a single laser won't be able to scratch your foes. So I don't really see the point. And it is perharps the reason why the laser tech was abandonned: it isn't enough powerful to enter the defenses you will be facing.

If you look at the various techs (say lasers) you'll notice that each new design doesn't neccessarily improve across the board. One model might be cheaper but take up more space. Another might be larger, more expensive but deal 2 points of damage. Some models are just all round better than a model 2 or 3 generations earlier. The point is that a new model isn't necessarily always better on a specific new ship design, sometimes you're better off backing up a generation or two.

The way the game has been designed, older weapon designs shouldn't get better over time. Your latter models are supposed to represent the improved version but the older versions are still there in case you'd rather build somethingless sophisticated but cheap.

Miniaturisation techs however let you fit more modules to your design so there is an indirect way to improve the older models.

Exactly, Diplomat Ugleb has hit the nail on the head.

In the game the "Laser" is like the 386 in the example above and "Laser 1" is like a 386 running at 10MHz, a "Laser 2" is a 386 at 25MHz, a "Laser 3" is a 386 at 25MHz with better manufacturing (therefore cheaper), a "Laser 4" is a 386 30MHZ, etc... Then we get onto a 486, which is a "Plasma" weapon and again we get a "Plasma 1" i.e. a 486 at 66MHz, a "Plasma 2", 486 at 1GHz, etc... You can still make the 386 running at 25Mhz, with the old style manufacturing and it'd probably be cheaper and easier to make now a days...

Well it makes sense to me. But I kill people for a living (only the bad ones). So what do I know.

Or like the new NASA designs for the next rocket to the moon.... electronically they look the same as the old ones... the internals are smaller (chip vs tube). the LEDs different, (although the same size??) the cost.... hahahah "astronomically" higher. Newer does not mean cheaper and as far as getting rid of techs once you have researched advances... no way. I love the Altarians... and I may help them out in a jam... with an older tech not my new one... being a greedy bastard I charge them too. No freebs here.

W/R
Suralle

Witch would be easier with todays tech?
Build a pyramid in a day ,or build a Spacestation in a year.
Do you understand what i mean?