Technology and Research changes

[snip]

Do note that with the equation presented above, it does become easier to catch up in tech as it is cheaper (and maybe takes less time, still thinking about that). So getting out of date does not mean you cannot catch back up later on your own, unlike N3 where you needed outside help to do so.

[Delta Force]

Technological sale effectively elimates national specialization, which is something that members of the community have desired.

We could do something I have done in my own nation sims and split technologies into two categories. One category would be the research and the other would be its adoption (building factories, coming up with applicable designs, etc.). If you get technological aid you have a reduction (or possibly elimination, but I prefer reduction) of the research costs/time but you still have to do the actual adoption in the normal timeframe and cost. Don't forget that in order to even be able to purchase technology someone must have researched it, so by the time you go through the step of purchasing and adopting the technology it will already have been in use for a few years.

[snip]

Technological sale effectively elimates national specialization, which is something that members of the community have desired.

We could do something I have done in my own nation sims and split technologies into two categories. One category would be the research and the other would be its adoption (building factories, coming up with applicable designs, etc.). If you get technological aid you have a reduction (or possibly elimination, but I prefer reduction) of the research costs/time but you still have to do the actual adoption in the normal timeframe and cost. Don't forget that in order to even be able to purchase technology someone must have researched it, so by the time you go through the step of purchasing and adopting the technology it will already have been in use for a few years.

That counts as a wholesale replacement of the tech system, and therefor is not allowable.

[Tanthalas]

Honestly I see no reason for wholesale replacement of the existing tech system, it needs a few tweaks sure but why fix what realy isnt broken.

[snip]

I have a proposal regarding startup tech levels. Working with the attached document, N3 tree with some added data, the process would work like this. Every nation starts out at the baseline of every level. If a category does not have a baseline listed, then no nation starts by default with any tech in that category. Some categories have ether Advanced, Cutting Edge, Dated and/or Primitive levels with a positive or negative number listed next to them. More advanced levels of a given technology, as denoted by Advanced and Cutting edge can be aquiered pre-start by taking an equivalent or greater point value from Dated and Primitive levels in other technologies.

Does this sound like a fair way to handle starting tech?

[Tanthalas]

Looks good to me, I say we take it and run with it.

[Delta Force]

Some thoughts:

Fire control should be moved back to earlier than 1908 seeing as HMS Dreadnought was one of the first ships to feature it.

The infantry and cavalry units starting in 1870 seems a tad far back as very few countries had such vintage weaponry in service by 1900. Everyone had 1880s or better bolt action rifles or Winchesters by then. Anything that old would probably have been in service with reserve units, not frontline ones. 1870 and 1885 reserves should be added to represent that.

The 1903 AA tech should probably be an 1890 baseline technology as the Maxim was first produced in 1889 and could do all the things described with that technology.

With the 1900 railway guns I think it should be 155 mm to cover the slightly larger guns in that range (152 mm and 155 mm). Also, any specific reason for 10 inch guns for the 1905 railway guns? It is a rather heavy gun compared to the 8 inch.

Overall it looks good and I think it covers everything well.

[snip]

This is the N3 tree, something which I want to leave as is unless is it absolutely necessary to change. Thought by thought.

The 1903 AA tech should probably be an 1890 baseline technology as the Maxim was first produced in 1889 and could do all the things described with that technology.

You need to have airplanes exist before you can figure out how to shoot them. No.

With the 1900 railway guns I think it should be 155 mm to cover the slightly larger guns in that range (152 mm and 155 mm). Also, any specific reason for 10 inch guns for the 1905 railway guns? It is a rather heavy gun compared to the 8 inch.

Its a difference of rather small numbers from 150 to 155, so no reason to dismiss this yet. As to the biger guns, it was that way before, so No.

The infantry and cavalry units starting in 1870 seems a tad far back as very few countries had such vintage weaponry in service by 1900. Everyone had 1880s or better bolt action rifles or Winchesters by then. Anything that old would probably have been in service with reserve units, not frontline ones. 1870 and 1885 reserves should be added to represent that.

You are misunderstanding the way those techs work. Reserve tech govern how much of your army can be held in reserve in comparison to active units while the infantry techs govener the level of equipment. No need to change anything here as it works fine as is.

Fire control should be moved back to earlier than 1908 seeing as HMS Dreadnought was one of the first ships to feature it.

I'm waffling about this one. For now, it will be left as is.

[Jefgte]

I think that we start in 1900 with all 1900 technos level.

Jef

[Nobody]

Here is my engine tech proposal addressing one SpringSharp shortfall, I wanted to make for weeks, but didn't have the time to do so.

One example* could look like this:
1935 Turbine, Geared drive: Engine Year 1935, max 55000 hp per shaft
1935 Turbine, Electric drive: Engine Year 1922, unlimited power per shaft, +20% range
1935 Diesel: Engine Year 1919, max 42000 hp per shaft, +140% range

Explanation:
SpringSharp does not care about the engine, if we want to have that flavor (and specialization), we have to do it ourself.
The electric drive proposal is based on real numbers (a Turbo-electric drive for Bismarck was expected to be 20% roomier and heavier than the geared drive) so I selected a engine year were the weight of the machinery is about 20% larger. The range factor is there mostly to offset the lower efficiency of the earlier machine.

For the diesel I had to guess, because I couldn't find the passage describing how much heavier they were, so I choose 25%. There range modifier give the ship twice the range as a normal 1935 ship on the same bunker (typical for diesel).


*)since I now have the data from SpringSharp I could easily do that for any required year.

[KWorld]

Turbo-electric drive was better for longer range ships than direct-drive turbines, but it was heavier and more expensive.  Compared to geared turbines, the main advantages to turbo-electric would be allowing better compartmentalization and more availability (the big precision gears needed for geared turbines were in limited supply, electric motors less so).

The USN is planning on testing turbo-electric drive and will probably adopt it for dreadnoughts and cruisers during the pre-geared turbine period.

[Nobody]

Turbo-electric drive was better for longer range ships than direct-drive turbines, but it was heavier and more expensive.  Compared to geared turbines, the main advantages to turbo-electric would be allowing better compartmentalization and more availability (the big precision gears needed for geared turbines were in limited supply, electric motors less so).

Which is why I though a higher shp limit for electric drive would be nice compensation. The efficiency is also bit better. The other advantages (compartmentalization and better maneuverability) are harder to represent in game.

[KWorld]

For turbo-electrics, the interesting question is whether they were 20% larger and heavier than what?  The entire system was 20% larger and heavier?  The system minus the boiler system was 20% larger and heavier?  Some other subset of the engine system was 20% larger and heavier?  I haven't seen anything that clearly defines that.

[snip]

I think that we start in 1900 with all 1900 technos level.

Jef

The PDF I posted shows that by default, everyone starts with the nearest tech level to 1900 in a given category. If you want to go beyond these basic techs, then you need to make some sacrifices. No need to modify the starting levels if you do not want to.

Here is my engine tech proposal addressing one SpringSharp shortfall, I wanted to make for weeks, but didn't have the time to do so.

One example* could look like this:
1935 Turbine, Geared drive: Engine Year 1935, max 55000 hp per shaft
1935 Turbine, Electric drive: Engine Year 1922, unlimited power per shaft, +20% range
1935 Diesel: Engine Year 1919, max 42000 hp per shaft, +140% range

Explanation:
SpringSharp does not care about the engine, if we want to have that flavor (and specialization), we have to do it ourself.
The electric drive proposal is based on real numbers (a Turbo-electric drive for Bismarck was expected to be 20% roomier and heavier than the geared drive) so I selected a engine year were the weight of the machinery is about 20% larger. The range factor is there mostly to offset the lower efficiency of the earlier machine.

For the diesel I had to guess, because I couldn't find the passage describing how much heavier they were, so I choose 25%. There range modifier give the ship twice the range as a normal 1935 ship on the same bunker (typical for diesel).


*)since I now have the data from SpringSharp I could easily do that for any required year.

Im torn on this. It does add flavor and makes choices more differentiated then clicking a checkbox. At the same time, it does add some complexity to the engine techs, which I know have raised complaint in the past about complexity in there current state. Nobody, if you would be so kind as to do these levels for the current engine tech levels assuming every option was available at each level (the independent techs for enableing each will stay), it would help with seeing exactly how much it would add and whether we want it to be integrated into the rule structure or not.

As far as the rule itself goes, Im not to fond of TE and diesel requiring older by year engines. What about using misc weight instead, seeing as SS3 allows us to put it below the waterline?

[Nobody]

For turbo-electrics, the interesting question is whether they were 20% larger and heavier than what?  The entire system was 20% larger and heavier?  The system minus the boiler system was 20% larger and heavier?  Some other subset of the engine system was 20% larger and heavier?  I haven't seen anything that clearly defines that.

Interesting question, never thought about that. It might be without boilers, at least that's what Bismarck's figures suggest (designed: 138k shp electric, build: 150k shp geared -> 8-9% difference).