Research / Tech Tree - Important Question

[George Geczy]

Well, the dev team has got into a heated debate about some elements of our tech tree and research model, so we need everyone's suggestions on which way we should work this out.

The basic question boils down to the following:

"If a country (such as the United States) knows how to do 'x', should all the sub-regions that broke away from it already know how to do it?"

For our example we'll use Nuclear Power Plants.

Option A: Sub-Regions keep the knowledge.
Since the US as a whole knew how to build Nuclear Power plants (which in the game encompass two research techs: Principles for Applied Nuclear Fission and Construction Technologies for Nuclear Power Plants), then all the Sub-Regions will continue to know this and be able to build the plants right away. The argument is that since the US was an integrated economy, it is expected that scientists/engineers and knowledge will move freely between the states, and the capacity and infrastructure to build advanced techs such as Nuclear plants will be kept by all.

Option B: Only Regions involved today should keep the knowledge.
Today, only four companies in the US design and manufacture Nulcear Reactor Systems (Westinghouse, General Electric, Combustion Engineering Co, and Babcock&Wilcox Co). Under this choice, only the US regions that are home to a Nuclear Reactor Systems manufacturing facility would get the 'Nuclear Power Plants' tech. Only regions that either have reactor manufacturing or a nuclear research lab would get the 'Nuclear Fission' tech. Everyone else would have to research it.

What's the difference in gameplay? Under option A, "common knowledge", every US region could build a Nuclear Plant starting day 1. Under option B, some regions could build it right away, others would need to obtain the pre-requisite technologies first. Depending upon research slots and spending, it would take between 50 and 150 days to research Applied Nuclear Fission, and between 85 and 250 days to research Nuclear Plant Construction. It would also be possible to obtain the two research pre-requisites by diplomatic sale or trade with a region that has them.

Under option A it is also possible (in fact, quite common) that a region would start with a pre-built nuclear power plant, but wouldn't be able to build a second one until they do the pre-requisite research.

Comments & opinions please!

[Baloogan]

A, methinks, would unbalance the game, tho it kinda already is, ala south new zeland vs 1/4 of asutralia matchup.
so A would fit into the game.

you know, when this game gets released ill wager a can of coke that the formus will be inundadted with whining whiners whining about how unfair the game is and how the first people who join a game will get the best countries, and thoese who join later get south newzeland

[tkobo]

I vote B.

Roughly 30 countries have nuclear reactors operating atm.There are also over 250 nuclear research reactors in over 50 countries.

If A was chosen,all of the regions these countries were made of would have the ability to build nuclear reactors from day 1.That would result in far too many regions with nuclear power.

Also if you went with A,youd have to take into consideration all the nuclear reactors on ships.When the countries broke up,just where would these end up ?How many more nations would get nuclear tech for free becuase they had nuclear reactors on the ships in thier possesion?

[Steelsky]

I am for option B definetely.

It will mean a bit tougher to balance the game I guess but that's a small price to pay in my opinion.

/Steelsky

[red]

I think regions should have research completed that reflects their academic and business ties with wherever/whoever has fully implemented the research. Experimental versions of the final applied product shouldn't count as the final, applied Prerequisite research.

[herr neumann]

Well you can certainly argue both ways, but my choise would be B.
Otherwise the US scenarios will be *too* balanced.

[Son of Moose]

Option B might indeed be more interesting. It also just might be more realistic as there is a very good chance that there might well be a substantial individual loss of knowledge after the disintegration of the US in circa 2010. The fall of the Roman Empire which was followed by the Dark Ages for several hundred years could serve as a precident.

[India 51A]

I opt for 'B' also, purely for the fact that I think it would make game play more interesting!

[BattleGoat]

I'll be honest... I'm for Option A but ONLY in the former US. One thing the game does not simulate is independent contractors. If State A decided to build a Nuclear Reactor and had the political will to do so, then they would order one and some firm would come in and build it for them. George wants to limit the ability to build new Nuclear Reactors to the states where those firms are located. BUT just because a Head Office is one place, doesn't mean that there aren't staff with the knowledge throughout the US - particularly in regions that already have one reactor that needs personnel to run it and maintain it --- then if you give it to a state just because it already has one reactor, but it's neighbor can't build one, we've given them an unplanned advantage. I want to stress that this is only being considered for the US (okay... maybe France, and Japan too) where a country that is capable of building Reactors breaks up and I, as that paricular scenario designer, believe the ability to build reactors should be present in all the regions of the scenario.

My second consideration is that our regional borders in a few of the scenarios, might seem a little arbitrary to some. California for instance, breaks up into four sub regions (N. California -where there already is a secession movement, S. California, San Francisco/Oakland area, and the Los Angeles Basin). The Southern California player just by happenstance, owns the only two nuclear reactors in the state, but they are only 3 and 4 hexes repectively away from Los Angeles. These provide a large amount of the electricity needed for LA, but now LA would have to import it from another region and could be subject to boycotts, and extortion. Shouldn't we allow them to build their own? As I've mentioned before, it swings the balance for a scenario in a way that I did not design when I built the scenario. And many of the other US scenarios will have the same factor dropped in.

Other notes...

"Naval Nuclear Reactors" are a separate tech, but if a region can build them it is assumed they can also build normal Nuclear Reactors.

[Juergen]

Well Option B might make the game more interesting by making the regions more diverse.
But if on the other hand this option ruins the "balance" in a scenario or just isnt plausible (like in the case of the US) then A should be choosen.

[George Geczy]

Thanks for all the feedback so far.

As he mentioned above, David is a fan of Option A to avoid arbitrary bonuses for certain regions. I prefer the 'let the cards fall where they may' Option B for the sake of variety and more options.

As another example, it just so happens that Westinghouse has a Nuclear Reactor Systems plant in Newington, New Hampshire. This gives a player starting in New Hampshire the benefit of Nuclear Plant Construction pre-researched, when his neighbor regions would not have this. In fact, a region that has nuclear plants in operation will usually not be able to build more on day 1, and it is even possible that a region that can build from the start (because it has the reactor assembly line) may not actually have a plant already in existence.

So it becomes arbitrary as to who has the tech and who doesn't; David doesn't like it that way, but I actually think this is one of the things that makes Option 'B' better - it mixes up the flavor of things, gives you different pluses and minuses for starting in different regions, and give you additional things to look at in game. If you are lucky enough to have the nuclear plant tech, should you sell it for cash? Should you trade it for something? Should you use it as leverage to sign a shared research treaty? Or if you don't get the tech at the start, should you buy it? Should you spend the 250 days it takes to research it? Should you increase your research funding to get it in 100 days? Or should you give up some of your own tech advantages and sign a shared research agreement to get it instead? Or should you focus on other techs instead, and forget about Nuclear power?

David and I both agree that every US region should be able to build Nuclear plants, but with Option 'B' many regions may have to research one or two pre-requisites first before they can put the first construction shovel in the ground. The decision on who gets the techs and who doesn't would be based only on where those component plants happen to be in the modern day, 'luck of the draw'.

With regard to balance, it should be noted that very few scenarios are really balanced for a an equal multi-player game; each scenario has regions that tend to be stronger or weaker in certain areas, and the relationships and diplomacy between regions is really what keeps things going - obviously in the US Northwest scenario, if you play Oklahoma, you better hope for some friends, since you won't be able to take on Colorado or Washington by yourself.

-- George.

[BattleGoat]

If you're "Oklahoma" in the US North West scenario then you're really going to need help... Oklahoma's not in that scenario, it's in the US South West

[George Geczy]

If you're "Oklahoma" in the US North West scenario then you're really going to need help... Oklahoma's not in that scenario, it's in the US South West

Ooops - I meant North Dakota. Both are "North-East corner of the map weaklings"...

[tkobo]

"David and I both agree that every US region should be able to build Nuclear plants, but with Option 'B' many regions may have to research one or two pre-requisites first before they can put the first construction shovel in the ground"

I still disagree with this.The premise of the game is that the regions that formely were united are now not.
They are on a competitive and often hostile footing.

I dont believe in such a setting a region who had the access to such high tech and power oriented advantanges would simply give them to thier nieghbors simply becuase they used to part of the same nation.
I dont even believe they would sell such services to other regions, at least not at prices or arrangements that would be feasible for the buyer.

[tinjaw]

I think all the regions should have the required knowledge. Don't forget that they will still need to take the time and money to build them, so the regions with pre-existing already have an advantage. No need to make it a game-tilting advantage.