Tech Editor, just my idea of it.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

YourBreakfast wrote:

This. The most complex TOs (engines for example), wouldn't need much work, only a player with brains.
Plus, we could have guides to making an engine/successful car, but that would only be for the very casual player.

@Scio, what exactly do you mean by modeling the parts on? Do we create the parts when we're building the Tech?

Still don't like this. At all. I am not making my automobiles' engines. That is what my Belgium researchers have just researched! Are you telling me they have to figure it out, and then i have to figure it out? Sense making none. And what about when we hit future techs? 'Oh, it's as simple as rearranging the superconductor alloy into a certain shape. Here's a three hour guide on how to do so.' No.

Basically, if my people have discovered the research 'Automobiles' i expect they know how to make them go.

Well it seems now then that FPs are not really necessary? FPs originally were small parts that had a unique purpose to them unlike anything else. TOs were groups of FPs that were used so as to not make that whole set of FPs again.
Kit Techs are a new term to me that, according to Keen, are a more casual mix of FPs and TOs.

Clearly you're thinking that creating an engine is just too complex and that when coming towards futuristic (nano age -type) Techs, the intricacy of these is too much.
And maybe it will be, but I don't understand why I can't have some diversity in creations.
If we go with "now just pop on an engine in your car to make it go" creations will practically be blocks of pixels with a bunch of the-right-type of FPs. Which frankly, reminds me A LOT like Spore.

What will be the limit when in comes to the freedom we have of creating techs with FPs?

YB: Kit Techs are just premade TOs for players who are too lazy to do their own TOs from FPs. FPs and player-made TOs stay exactly what they were before.

To be sure, I'l show it on an example: If you research "Combustion Engine", you will get both "Engine" Kit Tech and "Valve, Cylinder, Carburettor" FPs. Whether you will make your cars with the "Engine" Kit Tech, or with your own engine TO designed from FPs, that will be purely your decision.



Now, we should return to the variant concept. Here it is:

""Basically in TE, users could select any already existing Tech, and create a "variant" for it. These variants would be modified versions of the parent Tech. Changes would range from different weapon loadouts on military vehicles to completly different car models, the only limit on changes would be that the Tech has to stay at least vaguely similar to the parent Tech.

The game itself would also randomly create variants based on Techs, simulating creativity of people (this would corespond to tuning cars, but also to car companies producing new car models).""

Commander Keen wrote:

YB: Kit Techs are just premade TOs for players who are too lazy to do their own TOs from FPs. FPs and player-made TOs stay exactly what they were before.

To be sure, I'l show it on an example: If you research "Combustion Engine", you will get both "Engine" Kit Tech and "Valve, Cylinder, Carburettor" FPs. Whether you will make your cars with the "Engine" Kit Tech, or with your own engine TO designed from FPs, that will be purely your decision.



Now, we should return to the variant concept. Here it is:

""Basically in TE, users could select any already existing Tech, and create a "variant" for it. These variants would be modified versions of the parent Tech. Changes would range from different weapon loadouts on military vehicles to completly different car models, the only limit on changes would be that the Tech has to stay at least vaguely similar to the parent Tech.

The game itself would also randomly create variants based on Techs, simulating creativity of people (this would corespond to tuning cars, but also to car companies producing new car models).""

@Keen- i like the idea you outline dthere with engines. You would get them piece by piece by the research tree, then in the end you would get the engine kit tech. this will reward players with technical knowledge, because they could create the engine before their research actually lead to that, giving them a gameplay advantage.

Variants is a good idea, the problem is how the actual techs can be changed by the computer in a way that they don't turn to crap.

Okay, let's sort something out:

A Tech Object (TO) is a complete object used by the people of your nation.
A Function Part (FP) is a small piece of machinery that is used to add abilities to TOs.
A Kit Tech is a collection of FPs into an easy-to-use piece of machinery, for use in adding abilities to TOs.

Does everyone agree on this? Because there seems to be a number of variations on what these terms mean right now.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Okay, let's sort something out:

A Tech Object (TO) is a complete object used by the people of your nation.
A Function Part (FP) is a small piece of machinery that is used to add abilities to TOs.
A Kit Tech is a collection of FPs into an easy-to-use piece of machinery, for use in adding abilities to TOs.

Does everyone agree on this? Because there seems to be a number of variations on what these terms mean right now.

That seems right to me. If more people agree, then i'll add to the Dictionary.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Okay, let's sort something out:

A Tech Object (TO) is a complete object used by the people of your nation.
A Function Part (FP) is a small piece of machinery that is used to add abilities to TOs.
A Kit Tech is a collection of FPs into an easy-to-use piece of machinery, for use in adding abilities to TOs.

Does everyone agree on this? Because there seems to be a number of variations on what these terms mean right now.

Exactly how I meant it to be. Scio, please add it to dictionary.

Sciocont wrote:

Variants is a good idea, the problem is how the actual techs can be changed by the computer in a way that they don't turn to crap.

Maybe limiting the variants to quite minor for AI, or disabling them whole for it. But players would find it a quite useful function I guess.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Okay, let's sort something out:

A Tech Object (TO) is a complete object used by the people of your nation.
A Function Part (FP) is a small piece of machinery that is used to add abilities to TOs.
A Kit Tech is a collection of FPs into an easy-to-use piece of machinery, for use in adding abilities to TOs.

Does everyone agree on this? Because there seems to be a number of variations on what these terms mean right now.

I thought a TO was a collection of FPs and that Kit Techs were simple TOs that you get if you're too lazy to make a TO.

Basically I would say switch around the definition for KTs and TOs.
But it seems it has changed sooo....

YourBreakfast wrote:

I thought a TO was a collection of FPs and that Kit Techs were simple TOs that you get if you're too lazy to make a TO.

This still applies.

YourBreakfast wrote:

Basically I would say switch around the definition for KTs and TOs.

Whats the reason for it?

Will add to dictionary when we figure it out.

YourBreakfast wrote:

I thought a TO was a collection of FPs and that Kit Techs were simple TOs that you get if you're too lazy to make a TO.

Basically I would say switch around the definition for KTs and TOs.
But it seems it has changed sooo....

I've always thought of TOs as completed objects, ever since the Svenolutions! Forums.

But really, we just need to all be using the same terms to mean the same thing. Otherwise, to quote my english language teacher, a chair could mean an aardvark.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

YourBreakfast wrote:

I thought a TO was a collection of FPs and that Kit Techs were simple TOs that you get if you're too lazy to make a TO.

Basically I would say switch around the definition for KTs and TOs.
But it seems it has changed sooo....

I've always thought of TOs as completed objects, ever since the Svenolutions! Forums.

But really, we just need to all be using the same terms to mean the same thing. Otherwise, to quote my english language teacher, a chair could mean an aardvark.

When Red created the idea of FPs and TOs, here was his definition:

Red wrote:

A Function Part is a pre-made object, given to the player in the Tech Editor. It must be attached to some other Tech creation in order to be used. Function Parts are not complete objects; rather, they're individual traits that can be placed on other objects to give them abilities.

There would be a tray containing the player's "inventory" of usable Function Parts in the Tech Editor; likely, they'd be subdivided somehow, to keep things organized - because there will be quite a few of them.

A Tech Object is a unique, usable, complete creation that the player creates in the Tech Editor. Anything that is neither a Vehicle nor a Building may be considered a Tech Object. Tech Objects may contain multiple Function Parts, and therefore may have multiple abilities. They may be saved, and then loaded back into the Editor and attached to Vehicles or Buildings, or placed on "mannequins" of the player's species to create units with hand-held objects. In either case, the Tech Object will grant the exact same abilities & traits no matter how it is used. The abilities are determined by the Function Parts used in the Tech Object.

Think of Function Parts as abilities. Think of a Tech Object as a box for holding those abilities. When you give the "box" to someone, they get all the "abilities" inside. You don't necessarily need to put the "abilities" in a "box"; you can just place them one at a time. But the user may save the "box" (along with its contents), and re-use it as many times as they like on different creations - so it's much more convenient to do it that way, if you think you'll have more than one use for a Tech Object.

That clears things up a lot.

So a TO is actually a Kit Tech? Then what are things the player creates in the Tech Editor called?

US_of_Alaska wrote:

So a TO is actually a Kit Tech? Then what are things the player creates in the Tech Editor called?

Here is the definition I would think is necessary. It ties in with the old terms of FPs and TOs and, well.
"If it ain't broke - don't fix it" :

FP - A unique, single part, unlocked through research that adds something that no other FP can do. (eg. hydraulic piston)
TO - A collection of parts that, when put together right, can be used as to not always remake that set of parts. (eg. an engine)
KT - A TO that is unlocked through research. This is for people who want a simple TO without having to make one. It is aimed for more casual players.

YourBreakfast wrote:

US_of_Alaska wrote:

So a TO is actually a Kit Tech? Then what are things the player creates in the Tech Editor called?

Here is the definition I would think is necessary. It ties in with the old terms of FPs and TOs and, well.
"If it ain't broke - don't fix it" :

FP - A unique, single part, unlocked through research that adds something that no other FP can do. (eg. hydraulic piston)
TO - A collection of parts that, when put together right, can be used as to not always remake that set of parts. (eg. an engine)
KT - A TO that is unlocked through research. This is for people who want a simple TO without having to make one. It is aimed for more casual players.

But then what is an object completed in the Tech Editor?!?! Everyone else seems to understand that a Tech Object is a completed Tech, YB. Your function part definition is fine, but your KT...

I don't think we need a separate name for a premade TO as opposed to a player-made TO. Just calling it a TO will suffice, no?

US_of_Alaska wrote:

I don't think we need a separate name for a premade TO as opposed to a player-made TO. Just calling it a TO will suffice, no?

I started all the KT stuff as I did not want to write "player-made TO" all the time in above posts. I don't think it's really important though.

Commander Keen wrote:

US_of_Alaska wrote:

I don't think we need a separate name for a premade TO as opposed to a player-made TO. Just calling it a TO will suffice, no?

I started all the KT stuff as I did not want to write "player-made TO" all the time in above posts. I don't think it's really important though.

I just want us all to agree on something so that there's no confusion.

Well I only heard of KT on the first page, lol. I thought it was a new implementation when I was gone.
I think we all agree on FPs and TOs. But for KTs, well, people who want that in the game can decide, as I don't know how much it is needed....

US_of_Alaska wrote:

YourBreakfast wrote:

This. The most complex TOs (engines for example), wouldn't need much work, only a player with brains.
Plus, we could have guides to making an engine/successful car, but that would only be for the very casual player.

@Scio, what exactly do you mean by modeling the parts on? Do we create the parts when we're building the Tech?

Still don't like this. At all. I am not making my automobiles' engines. That is what my Belgium researchers have just researched! Are you telling me they have to figure it out, and then i have to figure it out? Sense making none. And what about when we hit future techs? 'Oh, it's as simple as rearranging the superconductor alloy into a certain shape. Here's a three hour guide on how to do so.' No.

Basically, if my people have discovered the research 'Automobiles' i expect they know how to make them go.

When they figure itout, they make a guide. And yes, you WILL go through that guide if you ever want a Spaceship!

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Commander Keen wrote:

@Alaska and Scio- Read this post:

What you would want would be Kit Techs, premade Tech objects that you get when you finish the research.

Also, construction from FPs would take 1-15 minutes, based on how much you want to fiddle with the tech. It would be just 2-6 FPs at max, and the parameters would be adjusted by arrangement, scaling and the "you can add here if you subtract there" system.

My point about futuristic technologies still stands. Just how will the player make a warp drive? You've given them the option to earlier, why not now?

Give them the option now! There'll be a guide for it, like anything else.

US_of_Alaska wrote:

Okay, let's sort something out:

A Tech Object (TO) is a complete object used by the people of your nation.
A Function Part (FP) is a small piece of machinery that is used to add abilities to TOs.
A Kit Tech is a collection of FPs into an easy-to-use piece of machinery, for use in adding abilities to TOs.

Does everyone agree on this? Because there seems to be a number of variations on what these terms mean right now.

No, a kit tech is a player-made FP.

I think that in the Tech Editor, your limits will be defined by three things: Invention, Discovery, and Cost. Invention is you can only have something if it's been invented. For example, you need to invent the wheel in order to use it in a vehicle. Discovery is when your race discovers something like electricity or hoverdrives, or just fire. As things are discovered, more invention possibilities are available, such as the light bulb, the electric motor, and other things. Sometimes inventions could lead to the invention of something else. And lastly, Cost is, well, the cost of the inventions and/or components. Of course, cost might be different, and perhaps nonexistent depending on how your city/race uses currency. I have no idea how trading would work for getting things, and if your city is ruled by a dictator, cost is almost nonexistent, as there would be slaves for getting everything.

Please don't post on a thread that's over a year old, especially when considering that before Deathbite's series of posts the last post was in 2010. All of the things you tried to address have already been addressed. If you want to discuss it please take it to the Miscellaneous thread.

Shouldn't this be archived or something then? so people can actually know it's outdated information

Yes, but mods don't always have the time to go through threads and move the old ones. Speaking of which, however, I'll be able to move some now.