branching out

I was thinking that when researching weapons, defense, and engines, that the improved designs should constitute a separate branch rather than just flowing into the next 'innovative' tech.
Something like this:

New Propulsion Techniques
|
V
Ion Drive
|
V
Impulse Drive -> Impulse drive 2 -> Impulse Drive 3
|
V
Warp Drive -> Warp Drive 2 -> Warp Drive 3 -> Warp Drive 4 -> Warp Drive 5
|
V
Hyperwarp Drive -> Hyperwarp Drive 2 -> Hyperwarp Drive 3

-------
The idea is that improving an existing tech is essentially miniaturization, and doesn't really help one to come up with a breakthrough revolution in propulsion (or whatever); that requires researching totally new concepts. It is, however, significantly easier to improve an already existing design than it is to create a new one from scratch, so research down an 'improvement' line is relatively quick and cheap, whereas researching the 'innovative' idea would take much, much longer, like several multiples of the time it takes to completely improve the previous tech, but you end up with a significant advantage. This would cause players to consider some short vs long term strategies concerning research.

Comments?
5,238 views 1 replies
Reply #1 Top
It's not just miniaturization I think, but a betterment of the engine's output as a whole. Small tweak in output, combined with removing larger parts that aren't needed anymore makes the engine better. These tweaks don't yet make it a whole new engine style, but the things they learn along the way are required to learn the new style of engine.

So what they learned in Impulse 2 and 3 they needed to know in order to come up with the concept for the warp drive.

It also is there to slow the ascent up the engine tech ladder. Combine the anomaly that gives 25% of current tech progress and TA Beta 3C's Creativity finishing current tech and your proposal could be very out of balance.