Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Strongpoint]

Just, the results would initially be less effective than the equivalent natural solution

I am relatively sure that the opposite is true. I see wood use as an immediate short term boost that will be outclassed by biological options later.

Let's say we develop basic bows. It is quite obvious that is a matter of time when workers, users of bows, will be phased of frontline service and bow may become a dead tech (not counting experience toward balistae or something like that) but it is an immediate boost to our current fighting force that costs us no or very little manpower (I think bugs may cause stuff like manpower used for production and stuff but this is a minor effect)

I am tempted to do what we are good at, rather than copying the The Loaf at what they are good at.

Who said that we are worse at developing technology than humans? We have lower starting point but we are not more stupid. Our unique advantage is gene manipulation, their unique advantage is magic. We both can use technology and tactics

[RAM]

But the starting point is fundamental to technology. Humans cannot, for example, make guns. Humans + many many millennia of civilisation can build guns. We could copy bows, but that would be useless because we can't use them. We could design a gender with human-like arms but that would be horrible. We could reverse-engineer the principals of bows and then try to invent a bow that works with our body-plans, but that would be a lot of work. If we are going to make technology then it should be things that make sense. A trebuchet is a whole lot of lever and string theory, but operating it mostly involves dragging things around, which we are actually good at. We still have no way to aim it though.

[Detoxicated]

For now id agree with you. But beetles in metal are tempting.

Maybe we should develop axe like arms to chop trees so we can build nice palisades and cut people

[VoidSlayer]

What if we make a cast that is a living gun/helmet. 

It could sit on the back of a worker and spew out acid strait forward when the worker makes a clicking signal, it is otherwise virtually blind.  It would be a hibernating obligate carnivore that is woken up before battle.  It has stubby legs that allow only slow movement but good clinging to it's host.  Also is heavily armored on one side to be a helmet/back guard for the worker.

[Strongpoint]

But the starting point is fundamental to technology. Humans cannot, for example, make guns. Humans + many many millennia of civilisation can build guns

Do you really think that in this game humans can't get gunpowder in few turns if they actively try?

Giant insects are impossible. Magic is impossible. Intelligent design of DNA is impossible. Rapid advancement of technology is impossible. All this is true in real life but not in the game.

[10ebbor10]

Do you really think that in this game humans can't get gunpowder in few turns if they actively try?

Honestly, I hope they can't.

I don't want this game to turn into Modern Age 2 : There's guns too. Thematically, it just doesn't feel right.

Anyway, I dislike bows because we already have spitters for that role, and I dislike using wood on workers because we don't have anywhere near enough wood to supply them, and I don't want to limit our worker numbers.

[RAM]

I expect that they can, and will, get magic guns within a dozen turns. But actual gunpowder? It is possible... But regardless, they would, well, actually, gunpowder is chemical rather than mechanical, and we are pretty good with chemicals. We could go from methane-based flame-throwers to liquid-methane vomit-cannons about as fast as the humans could hope to do some crude gunpowdery thing. But that is with a better starting-point then them on the chemicals, and them with a better starting point on fabrication. But they could probably do crossbows in a single turn, while it'd take about three to five for us to get there... Well, by my admittedly humble estimation... I don't doubt that they could magically body-warp someone into a werewolf to match our hunters, but it'd take them longer than it took us...

[Strongpoint]

I dislike using wood on workers because we don't have anywhere near enough wood to supply them, and I don't want to limit our worker numbers.

Yes we produce ~1800 workers per turn and have only 900 timber. But what stops us from having half of our workers using wood and half of our workers not using wood?

[10ebbor10]

The fact that then we'll need to manually adjust the percentage differences between the two.

[Strongpoint]

The fact that then we'll need to manually adjust the percentage differences between the two.

I see... You are assuming that we'll have to do something like this:

X% of budget > Unarmed workers - 1.1 manpower cost
Y% of budget > Armed workers 1.1 manpower cost, 1 timber cost

And micromanage that every turn. I expect a completely different thing.

X% of budget > Produce armed workers, when run out of timber, produce unarmed workers with manpower left.

It looks way more logical and similar to how league converts excessive manpower in slaves.
Do you really expect that Iituem will say "You tried to produce more armed workers than your timber allows you. Unspent manpower fizzles into nothingness."?

[10ebbor10]

I suppose that could work.

[Iituem]

Yeah, I'd essentially create a second caste of workers, "workers (clubs)", which would have the same stats as the worker but with the addition of shields and clubs, and they would reinforce preferentially.  If the equipment runs out, they revert to standard workers.

[Detoxicated]

Id rather see axes actually as we should try to gain better lumbering abilities

[FallacyofUrist]

Y'know, why are we using wood when we could be using engineered bones?

Future Theoretical Design: Osteourgy: We create designs for a drone that can modify it's own bones when ordered to telepathically. Exact technical process... I'm not sure about.

We can't improve wood, but we can improve bone.

[Strongpoint]

Axes looks like an interesting option but

1) How effective stone axes for timber producing comparing to "The middle legs have serrated ridges that double as weapons and saws for cutting wood and butchering meat"?
2) Is stone axe anywhere effective against armor? I think it is essentially a mace but then a balance stone mace or spiked club look more effective
3) Workes still use their forward limbs for moving. I proposed bows earlier because they can be discarded before going melee. Holding and axe in combat will make them way less mobile

I see two practical ways of improving workers by using timber

Shields for workers
Workers are not optimized for combat just as humans are. To mitigate this weakness hive imitates human invention and introduces shields. Two wooden shields are attached to workers forelimbs using both existing barbs and ropes made from bark to fixate them. Designed to not impede movements much, they are relatively small but still can be used to block enemy spears or protect vulnerable body parts like eyes against ranged fire.

Hunting bows for workers
With influx of carnivorous drones Hive adapts bows as a tool for more efficient hunting. It is much more energy efficient to shoot game from the safe distance than chasing it. Nevertheless those simple hunting bows that use chitin or stone-tipped arrows find their way to the battlefield useful both in long-range volleys and night-time ambushes.

First tries to increase protection, second tries to get more food while adding some offensive power to workers

Y'know, why are we using wood when we could be using engineered bones?
Future Theoretical Design: Osteourgy: We create designs for a drone that can modify it's own bones when ordered to telepathically. Exact technical process... I'm not sure about.

We can't improve wood, but we can improve bone.

Why? Well, It is simple
1) Complexity. Using wood is easy. We can get wooden stuff in one design. Getting what you propose will need way more time
2) Bones will have food cost. Wooden stuff have timber cost. We are sitting on a pile of 900 timber and it does nothing.
3) It is actually untrue that we can't modify wood. Our hive starts the road to modify other organism with modifying symbionts. Changing DNA of trees is not that far off from that.