Question about Tech Trades

[iamthey]

So the triyun/keshav conflict brought to my attention that perhaps I do not fully understand or otherwise interpret the tech trading rules in a way that is consistent to everyone else here.

The way I have always interpreted the rule is. The TE system gives each player an arbitrary value, you plug these values in along with various totals and the rule gives you a total number of advanced units you can purchase.

So I am buying planes from Rebel Army, or Germany, and TE says I can buy 60 squadrons from him. I am allowed to have 115 squadrons total. The way I have already viewed this is TE says I can buy 60 RA squadrons but I can still have 55 Greater Pacific squadrons keeping my total at 115 planes and giving me a 1 squadron to 1 plane ratio. [b](First view)[/b]

Others have contended that this is inconsistent with how the rule has traditionally been viewed. They claim that if the TE says I can buy 60 RA squadrons that this total in effect replaces my 115 potential Pacifican Squadrons giving me a 12/23 squad - IG plane ratio. (I have 60 total squadrons rather than 115).[b](Second View)[/b]

I personally view the first as more rational as the purpose of a tech trade is to gain some advantage or edge. The second view basically a wipes away any edge there was, as well as puts me at a disadvantage as now I have fewer resources to work with. My question to the RP community is A which has actually been the conventional interpretation? and B which do you consider a more valid interpretation.

If you have any personal examples or links to tech trades in the past that validate either of these views, links to them would be helpful as well. Honestly at this point I am not sure which is true or not, but rather than pursue pressing this particular issue, I thought it would be better to start a discussion on it.

As an aid here are the current public rules on tech trades.

[quote]Technological Trade.
The old 'tech share' is being scrapped. No longer shall nations have their entire advancement lifted by a few words on a treaty. Now, you can buy weapons / items from more advanced nations. However, this comes with a cost. For Modern and Third World nations, these advanced items will cost more than what your normal domestic ones would. Since economy is gone from CNRP, we have a simple formula to determine what you could have.

It is based on TE. We assume cost is directly proportional to TE. So, when buying a Item, here is how many you can afford.

#Advanced Items = #Buyer Items IG* (Buyer TE / Seller TE)

EXAMPLE
If you can have say, 1000 tanks IG at a TE of 1 (Ie you are a Modern nation) and you buy tanks from a First World nation with a TE of 1.3, you can have 1/1.3 * 1000 tanks = ~770 tanks[/quote]

(Null voted)

Edited June 27, 2010 by iamthey

[Lynneth]

The second is my view.
The first is ridiculous.

I've interpreted these techrules as the second view for ages, and I won't change that.
You buy better planes or whatever, but can only have a lower total due to more resources that need to be dedicated to keeping those high-tech things running.

Edited June 27, 2010 by Lynneth

[Centurius]

I have personally always considered it to be the second view, however then again I see the merits of the first but as the current rule stands I am assuming it is the second.

Edited June 27, 2010 by Centurius

[king of cochin]

I had always believed that it is the second interpretation that is the rule. A while back during a war game I had with nikonov, he had RPd fighter aircraft bought from Iamthey as per this rule, he RPd IAT's tech weaponry but assumed correspondingly reduced total number.

The same rule was also made applicable to me when I sought to improve my radars with a tech trade I attempted with V the King. On knowing the reduction in numbers it would entail, I withdrew from the deal.

[HHAYD]

If you are going to buy and operate more advanced aircraft, they tend to obviously be more expensive, demand more maintenance, more expensive equipments, and requires special training so your pilots are familiar with the aircraft and doesn't accidentally launch missiles before taking off and blow up the runway in front of them. So yeah, you will have a smaller air force. Now if you wanted a larger air force, you will have to downgrade to less advanced aircraft. If you still want to operate full amount of highly advanced aircraft, then you must RP them that they were poorly maintained and are not at their top performance as they should be.

Edited June 27, 2010 by HHAYD

[Centurius]

One note though, considering Vince has voted for 1 and if I recall correctly he came with the rule in the first place...

[Triyun]

[quote name='HHAYD' date='27 June 2010 - 01:02 PM' timestamp='1277640142' post='2351816']
If you are going to buy and operate more advanced aircraft, they tend to obviously be more expensive, demand more maintenance, more expensive equipments, and requires special training so your pilots are familiar with the aircraft and doesn't accidentally launch missiles before taking off and blow up the runway in front of them. So yeah, you will have a smaller air force. Now if you wanted a larger air force, you will have to downgrade to less advanced aircraft. If you still want to operate full amount of highly advanced aircraft, then you must RP them that they were poorly maintained and are not at their top performance as they should be.
[/quote]

This is not true. Buying from another producer pools R&D and parts costs and lowers cost per unit. More people who operate an aircraft means you have more volume, greater volume of production lowers the cost of both initial production (and spare part production which is most expensive). Developing a domestic fighter program for every weapon system would require a much higher number of research and development programs, which would dramatically increase the cost of the weapon systems. Pooling resources is almost always better from a cost perspective.

Edit: I would also point out that more advanced does not always equal more difficult maintenance. For example, the Gerald Ford Class will be substantially easier to service than the Nimitz Class.

Edited June 27, 2010 by Triyun

[Captain Enema]

Sure, the Gerald Ford Class will be easier for the American Navy to keep afloat,but the same can not be said for the Somalian navy...

[king of cochin]

[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' date='27 June 2010 - 08:15 PM' timestamp='1277649916' post='2351868']
[b]Sure, the Gerald Ford Class will be easier for the American Navy to keep afloat,but the same can not be said for the Somalian navy...[/b]
[/quote]
^This

It is not the question of production models etc, it is about maintenance and operation. Weapons of war are far more fragile than civilian or commercial systems. A truck can run thousands of kilometers without much servicing but a tank can barely travel 300 or so kilometer without needing track changes and n other maintenance. This is more true for military aircraft, especially fighters.

[Centurius]

[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' date='27 June 2010 - 04:45 PM' timestamp='1277649916' post='2351868']
Sure, the Gerald Ford Class will be easier for the American Navy to keep afloat,but the same can not be said for the Somalian navy...
[/quote]

Good job missing the point sir. Triyun isn't saying it is easy to maintain he is saying it is [b]EASIER[/b] to maintain than the older class.

However while you have a point Triyun it should be reflected in some way that due to the advantage you maintain less.

[Triyun]

^ That.

The fact is IRL, no third world country really would be servicing aircraft carriers [b]at all.[/b] Only the P-5 plus Japan really have blue water navies anyway atm. Same with fighter jets and strategic bombers. However, this is not the case in CN RP. I would point out that third world countries are much more likely to be flying aircraft that they still make the parts for. There are also plenty of third world countries flying F-16s and Mig-29s. With aircraft technology in CN RP being more advanced than IRL (thats fair to say I think with the high number of Fifth Gens), it would be fair to expect a similar pattern to emerge with 5th Gen aircraft instead of 4th Gen aircraft being built in major aerospace manufacturing nations.

Edited June 27, 2010 by Triyun

[king of cochin]

Are you perchance arguing that an equipment used by a 9K tech nation is equivalent to an equipment used by a 2K tech nation? If so, surely you would have no right to claim any technological superiority against Keshav' 5K tech!

[HHAYD]

If 1000 tech players' military size aren't affected even when they use 9000+ tech stuff, then everyone is going to start using that. Few players who decide not to use it would be hopelessly murdered and overall, RPs would be boring.

[king of cochin]

[quote name='HHAYD' date='27 June 2010 - 09:59 PM' timestamp='1277656126' post='2351941']
If 1000 tech players' military size aren't affected even when they use 9000+ tech stuff, then everyone is going to start using that. Few players who decide not to use it would be hopelessly murdered and overall, RPs would be boring.
[/quote]

Then as an alternate opinion do away with the TE system entirely! No Tech trade. You buy something from others, you use it in terms of your own tech/improvement/wonders and not that of the seller. This would remove a lot of abuse and potential for abuse.

[Lynneth]

If 9k tech would be equal to 2k tech, I'd just give out free guns to everyone! No more tech advantages!

My god.

[HHAYD]

[quote name='Lynneth' date='27 June 2010 - 11:36 AM' timestamp='1277656552' post='2351947']
If 9k tech would be equal to 2k tech, I'd just give out free guns to everyone! No more tech advantages!

My god.
[/quote]
That means a 7k infra country with 50 tech can brutalize a 3k infra country with 5k+ tech...

[Manetheren]

We got rid of tech trades for a reason. Technology is so much more than one fighter jet. The USA could give the Central African Republic F-22s but that doesn't mean they can maintain them or operate them. Obviously the difference between the US and France is negligible but that is represented in the fact that first world nations have negligible tech differences already.

The second is the rule, first is ridiculous.

[Executive Minister]

If the idea is to buy a bunch of high tech machines from an ally to get their tech advantage, then obviously the 2nd. However, I voted the first as I have yet to see someone go LOLLAVOTECH... I mean right now its purely for aesthetic purposes. Ikrolm buying some of my NDII Defender Heavy Tanks can attest.

[king of cochin]

[quote name='Executive Minister' date='27 June 2010 - 10:43 PM' timestamp='1277658810' post='2351987']
If the idea is to buy a bunch of high tech machines from an ally to get their tech advantage, then obviously the 2nd. However, I voted the first as I have yet to see someone go LOLLAVOTECH... I mean right now its purely for aesthetic purposes. Ikrolm buying some of my NDII Defender Heavy Tanks can attest.
[/quote]

EM, the issue has arisen precisely because Triyun is using "LOLLAVOTECH" against Keshav and not accepting to conform to the existing rules by which he has to take reduction in quantity to account for increase in quality.

[Voodoo Nova]

[quote name='king of cochin' date='27 June 2010 - 01:20 PM' timestamp='1277659199' post='2351993']
EM, the issue has arisen precisely because Triyun is using "LOLLAVOTECH" against Keshav and not accepting to conform to the existing rules by which he has to take reduction in quantity to account for increase in quality.
[/quote]

When 2 GM's state the rule differently, it becomes a discussion not a rule. Lets see what the community decides.

The 2nd one makes more sense in terms of realistic usage of advanced aircraft purchased from someone with much more tech than you.

[king of cochin]

[quote name='Voodoo Nova' date='27 June 2010 - 11:06 PM' timestamp='1277660184' post='2352014']
When 2 GM's state the rule differently, it becomes a discussion not a rule. Lets see what the community decides.

The 2nd one makes more sense in terms of realistic usage of advanced aircraft purchased from someone with much more tech than you.
[/quote]

When the question regarding interpretation of existing rules (aka the LOLLAVOTECH issue) arose, the GMs had dissension in interpretation hence community decision was sought. I was just telling EM, how the dissension in interpretation occurred.

[Executive Minister]

Alright. I will say now that I conform to the 2nd option. If one is capable of fielding 120 planes, but is 1k tech and wants to buy from someone with 10k tech to gain their advantage, there must be a limit placed on that capability. However, I can say that the way the rule is worded, it would appear that one is capable of buying x amount of advanced weapons whilst also making the remainder be weapons of their own tech level.

If the 1st option is the norm, then it is flawed, as there is no downside to this advantageous purchase of weapons. Everyone and their mother would be banging on Lynneth's or Lavo's door to buy their slice of the tech pie. By making it so one IS able to have an artificial tech advantage, their overall 'paper strength' or number of weapons should be lowered.

[Yawoo]

I voted for the second option. If a nation who doesn't have a lot of tech is buying military hardware from a 9k tech nation, then they should take a reduction in their air force.

Let's take away the fact that buying 60 squadrons of planes from a 9k tech nation when you are 2k is ridiculous because it would probably bankrupt your country to even pay for those planes, not that we RP the financial system well, if at all in CNRP... and let's take a look at your air force.

In regards to the first option: If you're buying military hardware from a 9k tech nation when you are 2k then the hardware you bought will outclass your additional hardware so much that you should probably RP out your airmen who aren't chosen to pilot the new hardware. Don't you think that there will be division and anger in your air force when half your pilots are chosen to pilot fancy new aircraft that are two generations ahead of your current aircraft while the second half of your air force would be forced to pilot, what would be essentially, a bi-plane in comparison?

In regards to all options: We should also look at the fact that it takes [b]years[/b] for a military fighter pilot to be adequately trained in a specific jet - and some training doesn't even happen until after flight school, such as landing on rolling and pitching aircraft carrier decks during the middle of a storm out in the ocean. So, say you can buy 60 squardrons of aircraft from Lavo.... you should take [b]at least[/b] three months to train your pilots before fielding those Lavotech/whatever aircraft in war. To say an RPer's pilots can go from piloting an F-22 to a fifth generation plane bought from another RPer without any sort of RP'd training of the new hardware is ridiculous. Crashes will happen during training, pilots will die... so RP it out!

Edited June 27, 2010 by Yawoo

[Executive Minister]

In addition, I think there should not be a backdoor to this amendment to the tech sharing rule:

A 10k tech nation buying 1k tech machines does not get to go over the set limit for RP airforces/tanks/etc.

[HHAYD]

[quote name='Executive Minister' date='27 June 2010 - 01:17 PM' timestamp='1277662611' post='2352050']
In addition, I think there should not be a backdoor to this amendment to the tech sharing rule:

A 10k tech nation buying 1k tech machines does not get to go over the set limit for RP airforces/tanks/etc.
[/quote]
What? But I wanted to RP 25k+ WWII Sherman tanks thousands of squadrons of propeller powered fighter aircraft being thrown at someone.

Edited June 27, 2010 by HHAYD