Tech Spread to keep balance

[fabius]

A few 4x games could lead to massive disparity in tech so that battles and wars were no contest.

I really hope that Stellaris has some tech spread mechanic for majors, like EU IV where it's cheaper if you or AI are behind to avoid complete rolf stomps mid to late game.

I reckon supremacy of 2 or 3 generations would be ok, so long as battles could still be lost to numbers, attrition from long wars or coalitions.

Maybe everybody wouldn't like this but imo it's better to have some balance maintained.

 

[J.P.Cliffer]

Well I'm against tech spread for main military tech or allow it if they got some weapon industry income bonus.( they must spy to acquire advanced tech)
And roflstomp is natural in history.
For economic and social tech i think the spread would be limited by the ethos. A dictatorial won't allow tech spread and would kill. And a democratic one would let a lot of civ catch up but in exchange for diplomatic favours.
And no tech spread for pre-hyperdrive planet or by event or decisions."Like Ancient civ"

 

[EntropyAvatar]

In my ideal space 4x game, technology is all about tech spreading. Ideas would pop up on planets at a rate governed by population, freedom and investment. From there, they would spread along lines of trade and communication. If you were an open society, hooked into the major trade lanes, these ideas would quickly spread to you, and you'd always be close to the cutting edge. A hermit empire, that closes off trade and scorns outside ideas would easily fall behind (though they might possess a few breakthroughs that never spread outside their cloistered systems).

It doesn't sound as though Stellaris is going along that path, though I think some diffusion of knowledge still makes sense. If you are in constant trade contact with a society, they may guard their highest tiers of military techs, but their other innovations will mostly be there to see, and even for military techs, the foundations of their older techs will be accessible. Of course, being able to see examples of a tech should make it easier to develop your own, but I don't think it should ever be entirely free. Some amount of resources should always be required to develop your own capability.

 

[Ingros]

i would give a bonus to research of certain stuff i you see it in action.... so living next to each other, trade and talk with each other or just monitor the other races (openly or secretly) should give you an insight of the existing technology if it's not to superior... also of course, seeing a complete new tech in action like warp or jump drive could give you the idea (and the research at all), while just noticing that the other guys can warp faster /longer jumprange may not give you any hints why it works (but just that it works)...
so i hope to see some kind of dynamic techtree to not just be able to research xyz but to also have the idea first.. you could get the idea also based on other techs or science or artefact or encounters etc but also by seeing that at your neighbors... so in the end it would be "easier" and faster for you to just copy the stuff your neighbor has but to invent it your own..

but for military stuff you probably won't be able to see the offensiv and defensive capabilities in action until you declare war or monitor them in a fight against someone else (joint activities vs pirates anyone? ) Also it could be useful to only have your oldest ships patroling the borders to your ally if you don't want them to know about your real power

it should also be possible to restrict access to certain systems (e.g. different security layers)..trade, economy etc. will be harmed in that system but espionage is very difficult either

 

[zukodark]

Trading between two empires should decrease the cost. In addition, empires should be able to make technology sharing agreements, which would decrease the cost for both empires, by 5% for each such relations (to a maximum of 15% or something).

 

[fabius]

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, more reduced cost to research something if there is contact with a race that is ahead and or bonus from espionage. Sounds like we'll get major boosts from science ships.

 

[D Inqu]

I'm still hoping for tech spread to be to be something earned, difficult and often outright impossible to do without empire effort. Tech of similar levels may slowly creep across to other factions, but which is racial, unique discoveries (from anomalies etc.) or simply far more advanced should not creep at all (though trade would greatly benefit as you trade things other empires can't replicate).

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

General civilian technology is always at the heart of what military technology can achieve and is always a derivation of that basic civilian technology. Even if you have a great military industry and you can get some applied civilian application from it here on Earth it is the civilian sector that drives the core of technology forward and sharing that core is the heart of our recent advances in technology for the last couple of hundred years.

Two societies even if alien to each other that share open trade will automatically tap into that core technology. It then just is a matter of using applied science to produce military application of the core advancement in science. So... in essence it would be very hard for two trading civilization to not automatically share their most fundamental understanding of technology at some level.

If you are a benign civilization that happen to stumble upon a civilization on a planet with a low technology understanding you could quickly lift them close to your civilian standard if they are able to adapt and you have free open trade with them. This, of course, assume they have the mental capacity to embrace advanced technology and if so they should be able to embrace it within a few generations at least.

 

[aitaituo]

I don't actually care for tech spread/sharing/trading being an important mechanism. I prefer the Paradox standard, where one faction may be very, very far behind the current tech leader and tech spread is passive process with limited benefits except in the most extreme uses (conquer Constantinople in CK2, hoard MPs and westernize early in EUIV, inventions in V2).

When tech trading and sharing is an important and active process, invariably I see a tech leader emerge, then their friends become tech leaders/equals, then everyone else gets stomped or gets assimilated into the tech hoarding power block. It's, frankly, stressful rather than fun, because you have to find ways to buy tech or have it shared with you or you risk annihilation down the road because you didn't get into the Western club or it feels like an impending doom if you start too far away to jump on the tech bandwagon. Sometimes games implement these mechanics in such a way that you can eventually recover through aggressive trading, or more often through some kind of seize tech during conquest mechanic. I don't think I've seen a game that made tech trading/sharing actually reduce tech disparity overall, though they do tend to benefit human players who can plan around it more than AIs that didn't start in advantageous positions. These games often have a synthetic feel to technology, too, where everyone ends up using the same techs at the same time or close equivalents.

From a realism standpoint, tech trading doesn't make much sense. You can gift computers to China, but you can't make them upgrade from Windows 98 to Windows 10. Technological development is as much about implementation as it is simply inventing a tool that is economically viable. I hope Stellaris will keep things indirect and have an effective research rate that keeps the starting factions relatively on par with each other naturally in terms of total techs, though not the specific techs they have at any given point. I like the idea of tech spread through sending scientists to study wreckage and debris.

 

[Jorgen_CAB]

I just wish that games like this separated core technology from applied technology be them civilian or military. A society could easily have a raging advancement in core science and civilian application but never invest more than the bare minimum in military to produce the most basic needs for policing its citizens. But if they ever diverted huge economic wealth into military they should be able to build up good military within a few years or a decade perhaps, depends on their needs. An example of this would be the US in WWII that were technologically advanced and with a huge civilian industry but with a mediocre military industry. They had a large navy but that was it... in a few years they had the most advanced and feared military on earth, mainly based on that basic science and a huge civilian industry converted into military use.

I really would like to see most technologies having more of a civilian and/or military option. So when you choose to you can lean heavily on one or the other side and basically sidestep military advancement if you don't think you need it. You should not have to research military or civilian technology in a set sequence.

Let's say that you are always presented with three choices for each technology breakthrough... you could now choose between advancing the general theoretical knowledge or a specific civilian or military application of the current theoretical level of that science type. Or something like this...

The basic theoretical knowledge should be the type of knowledge that tend to migrate through (passive) trade to other civilizations.

 

[Dutch Empire]

Maybe between allied and or close trading countries. Otherwise not.
Militarily wise every western nation (even the small ones) can easily win a war with most other countries in the world except maybe a few. This would not be possible if western technology was not so advanced as it is. Western countries share technologies because they co-operate. But this is because we reached agreements, our technology doesn't spread itself. Chinese and Russians spy to steal technology.

 

[fabius]

The more I think about this the more it seems there are many factors to tech spread. Like somebody mentioned above, the mere fact of knowing something can and has been done is a boost in itself. Think A bomb as an example. Todays cost is still high, but nowhere near what it was for the first.

I've read several times that one reason great powers diminish their lead is that it's generally cheaper for other to catch up in tech and major infrastructure advances.

From the replies here, sounds like there's some support but not outright tech spread for everything.

The main point still stands though. A mid to late game where small fleets can rolf stomp anything the AI puts together would be no fun. So I reckon the Devs will avoid this.

 

[D Inqu]

The more I think about this the more it seems there are many factors to tech spread. Like somebody mentioned above, the mere fact of knowing something can and has been done is a boost in itself. Think A bomb as an example. Todays cost is still high, but nowhere near what it was for the first.

The cost is still insanely prohibitive. Only 3 countries in the world have a full indigenous nuclear capability (with fourth one trying to catch up). The basic science behind the A-Bomb is now not a secret, but the production of something which is a reliable weapon is still beyond the means of most economies.

I've read several times that one reason great powers diminish their lead is that it's generally cheaper for other to catch up in tech and major infrastructure advances.

Again, it what you call "catch up". How many countries are advanced in terms of consumer electronics? Depending on how you interpret the term, your answer will range from dozens to only a couple. Because the are a number of places which work and design various electronics, but there is very few places where the actual high end processor chips are produced.

 

[Dutch Empire]

Dig luugs

 

[henzington]

The nature of the tech tree means that there will be difference even if tech is the same and since they haven't explained research its hard to say if we will see the massive difference like in Masters of Orion 2.

 

[Fireplay]

The nature of the tech tree means that there will be difference even if tech is the same and since they haven't explained research its hard to say if we will see the massive difference like in Masters of Orion 2.

I thought they weren't going with a tech tree and instead using some kind of triple deck system?

 

[fabius]

The cost is still insanely prohibitive. Only 3 countries in the world have a full indigenous nuclear capability (with fourth one trying to catch up). The basic science behind the A-Bomb is now not a secret, but the production of something which is a reliable weapon is still beyond the means of most economies.


Again, it what you call "catch up". How many countries are advanced in terms of consumer electronics? Depending on how you interpret the term, your answer will range from dozens to only a couple. Because the are a number of places which work and design various electronics, but there is very few places where the actual high end processor chips are produced.

Good point about the what is meant by 'catch up'. Well the gap has significantly narrowed for many. A bomb still expansive, but that's only over a short period, historically speaking.

I thought they weren't going with a tech tree and instead using some kind of triple deck system?

Hmm... yes I completely forgot about that. Still whatever system is used, huge disparities wouldn't be good for making the game fun.

 

[henzington]

Yeah misspoke as so many games use a tree as it is usually the term in these games.

 

[BaronIronmaggot]

I'd rather have the tech function like in CK 2 - minus the monarch mana and rather ability to allocate income to a field to advance faster in it. And this could work well with the three card system, when the CK 2 style tech is the passive form and the cards are something like the random events that are spawned by the technology simulation.