Simcountry Home   Simcountry Documentation   Simcountry Documentation   Simcountry Terminology
online games, multiplayer games
spacing
bullet Simcountry is an Online Digital World where you are the President of a country.
spacing
bullet No download needed!
spacing
What is Simcountry?
Beginners Info
What is Simcountry?
| | | | |
Previous Thread: Stuff it!
Next Thread: Selloing shares

High tech weaponry

Simcountry: Simcountry Bulletin Board  High tech weaponry

almoth

Thursday, December 11, 2003 - 09:56 am Click here to edit this post
This is a follow up to a discussion with matt on the topic.

__
Would it be possibly to have in the future high tech weapons that require a certain "tech level" or standard of education in a country before they can be built?. Examples of the sorts of weapons im imagining, stealth fighters / bombers, ASTOR etc.

The advantages of this would be


A) Education would be more important, atm it raises welfare, and increases graduates. Neither of these are really important in a world with worker transfers.

b) Increased player interaction: Countries with the required education/tech level would be prized commodities, their goods valued. It could potentially result in lots more horse trading.

c) War variation.
We would have different army structures facing each other. Instead of people using roughly the same armies. For instance some people may buy large quantities of the std weapons on the open market. Others may invest heavily in procuring "high tech" equipment either through trade deals, or through raising their own education. The balance of which proved a best strategy would be fun and interesting to discover.

Shadowstorm No Ceos

Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 07:59 am Click here to edit this post
A very good suggestion.

Grey

Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 10:50 am Click here to edit this post
A) Education would be more important, atm it raises welfare, and increases graduates. Neither of these are really important in a world with worker transfers.

What?!? The most basic need of a successful country is a high education index. Transferring in educated workers is not only unrealistic in the amount of time and micro-management it would take, but would require a country with a high education index to transfer with.

As I've said before, I think this is a terrible idea. The playing field is already very unbalanced, and this would only do it more.

And I don't see how this would increase interaction at all. It would only concentrate power even further and make the game more difficult for most players. If you call begging a rich country for a stealth bomber "interaction", then I have to wonder what your real goals are.

c) War variation.
We would have different army structures facing each other. Instead of people using roughly the same armies. For instance some people may buy large quantities of the std weapons on the open market. Others may invest heavily in procuring "high tech" equipment either through trade deals, or through raising their own education. The balance of which proved a best strategy would be fun and interesting to discover.


That is already possible. All you're proposing is restrictions on some countries (not yours).

This could forseeably create a monopoly of power, and I think deep down that's what you want. Under your proposal, a rich, highly educated country could possess more powerful weapons which take up less workers. Which means they could either 1) Use more workers in their economy, keeping them at the top of the ladder in the rankings, 2) build more weapons keeping them dominant in the military aspect and/or 3) use these advantages to maintain their dominance.

almoth

Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 04:53 pm Click here to edit this post
quote
______
What?!? The most basic need of a successful country is a high education index. Transferring in educated workers is not only unrealistic in the amount of time and micro-management it would take, but would require a country with a high education index to transfer with.

As I've said before, I think this is a terrible idea. The playing field is already very unbalanced, and this would only do it more.

And I don't see how this would increase interaction at all. It would only concentrate power even further and make the game more difficult for most players. If you call begging a rich country for a stealth bomber "interaction", then I have to wonder what your real goals are.

_____


I disagree, keeping MLM topped up is perfectly possible in poor edu countries.

As to me wanting this to "keep people dominant" thats nonsense. Anyone can build strong education and infrastructure if they want to. You seem to think only older players are able to build universities etc??. You also totally misjudge why i think it would be good. Its not about "getting a monopoly" at all matty, its about giving people a lot to think about when deciding how much effort to put into various factors in their country other than wether they have sufficient MLM to build the units.

almoth

Saturday, December 13, 2003 - 04:58 pm Click here to edit this post
apologies if that sounded rude matty, i just think u misunderstand my motives

ahh time for a weeks break getting myself annoyed over a game

Cerulean

Sunday, December 14, 2003 - 08:10 am Click here to edit this post
So then if building a high education index is so easy (and I argue that it isn't for newer players), then how would this feature spark interaction between players?

To go off of your points:

a) a high education index is already very very important

b) it would not increase interaction for reasons stated above

c) we already have as much war variation as could be possible. This feature would only limit variation.

minas tirith

Sunday, December 14, 2003 - 01:20 pm Click here to edit this post
well in all honesty very high education is a pain in the butt and causes me all sorts of problems .

Its more hassle than its worth, if not for the welfare id have a low index but im hoping immigration will be turned on eventually (perhaps it is??)

minas tirith

Sunday, December 14, 2003 - 01:22 pm Click here to edit this post
Just an example of ne trade that would eventually come about

low edu countries often have far less LLW issues. They would prolly have the high edu countries over a barrel demanding whatever weapons they wanted for the LLW

Hectors Dream

Sunday, December 14, 2003 - 01:33 pm Click here to edit this post
high edu countris do not have 'llw issues' until they haev filled up their economy to the max and built a mature army.

Once that happens, they have simply used up their population as effeciently as they can. Education has little to nothing to do with the existence of this limit/wall.

Getting workers for constant growth really isnt that important for most players - at least, not critical. If it is, they can usualy take care of it within their own empires.

Frankly, education indices are too easy to get. You already know I find the idea interesting and realistic in principle elle, but anyone who wants it achieves a 500 edu index in very short order, at very small sacrifice.

If it were much harder to achieve this (requiring elementary and secondary schools with large maintenace costs, and if paying government salaries at low levels made the teachers quit or perform poorly, maybe even requiring massive input and assitance from other countries in an empire) then this suggestion woudl be meaninful.

Until then, it is not, and we have analagous investment in low and high tech weapons wrt things like jeep rushes vs. RDU/fighter assaults.

Simcountry Introduction