Page 2 of 2

Re: Question for Kanuck.

Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 1:14 am
by Telros
*regrows finger* I'll be addressing each quote reply section independently, so don't get confused by the format.

I know SW and Schlock have incredibly different tech, dynamics, culture, scope, etc. I intended both to be a development stage for the Telrosians, with the Schlock being the finalish stage for them. I know the fleets would play differently, since Schlock is more about long range and movement, a lot of which you have taken to heart, eh Kanuck? Tell me more about this battlewagon, I'm not sure what you mean by it. SW stage will have fighters, while Schlock will develop missile swarms to save lives.

As for the mix, I'd say heavy on the missiles, no fighters as I said, drones I am not sure what you mean by them other than sensor drones, and energy would be heavy weapons, rare and powerful. And I do not know how many kinds of energy weapons there are, I can only think of graser and plasma.

I'm not sure what you mean by social dynamic. And by industry, you mean factories, economy and such right? Well, in both the future SW and Schlock stages, the industry gets ramped up a fuckload, especially when fabbers come into play. And that is true about D-tech. I mean that I would like to make countermeasures for D-tech without having to go the route Bal and Godular have. I am sure you have weapons and devices to combat it without being the dimensional masterminds those two are.

Re: Question for Kanuck.

Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:42 am
by Otagia
I'm not sure what you mean by social dynamic.
The important thing to consider when adding any technology to your nation is what its effect on society would be, not how many people you can blow up with it. Fabbers, for instance, provide the ability to cheaply and easily manufacture almost anything, which wreaks merry havoc on an unprepared economy, especially given sufficient energy sources (which, with Shlock-tek, is a given). Likewise, teleporters or such can drive cabbies out of business, eliminate requirements for public transit, and (depending on the range of the things) eliminate the need for non-military vessels entirely.

Re: Question for Kanuck.

Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:49 am
by Solar Communes
Speaking about social dynamics, what's the point of capitalism in a post-scarcity society? In fact "The Man" would probably fight against such achievement to avoid losing the privileges that are natural from having more wealth and power than others. And post-scarcity, a market would become pointless for most things as well. Over-supply would mean nobody would pay for most things unless the rich and powerful hoarded everything in ridiculous levels to create an artificial scarcity to ensure the maintenance of the establishment.

Re: Question for Kanuck.

Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:20 am
by Kanuckistan
Solar Communes wrote:Speaking about social dynamics, what's the point of capitalism in a post-scarcity society? In fact "The Man" would probably fight against such achievement to avoid losing the privileges that are natural from having more wealth and power than others. And post-scarcity, a market would become pointless for most things as well. Over-supply would mean nobody would pay for most things unless the rich and powerful hoarded everything in ridiculous levels to create an artificial scarcity to ensure the maintenance of the establishment.

Service industries, resource industries, information technology, engineering and design, entertainment media, art, medical service and technologies, research and development, etc., etc.

There's more to life than material posessions, and even if you can make stuff, you still need the power, raw materials, and most importantly, a design to feed your fabber. And you probably had to buy your fabber.

People become less dependent on the economy, but it's still there to supply everything you either can't, or don't want to be bothered making yourself.

Re: Question for Kanuck.

Posted: Fri Dec 12, 2008 7:00 am
by Hyperspatial Travel
Solar Communes wrote:Speaking about social dynamics, what's the point of capitalism in a post-scarcity society? In fact "The Man" would probably fight against such achievement to avoid losing the privileges that are natural from having more wealth and power than others. And post-scarcity, a market would become pointless for most things as well. Over-supply would mean nobody would pay for most things unless the rich and powerful hoarded everything in ridiculous levels to create an artificial scarcity to ensure the maintenance of the establishment.
In a post-scarcity society the form of economic organization is relatively unimportant. There's no more point to capitalism (or private property) than there is to a system in which all property is communal. Except, of course, when one is talking about the achievements of the mind (patents, works of art, etc), which are still scarce in a post-scarcity society, depending on the preferences for art.

Of course, presuming that post-scarcity isn't a static state (as we all seem to be wont to do), capitalism is still the most efficient method of promoting technological progress.

Re: Question for Kanuck.

Posted: Sun Dec 14, 2008 4:08 am
by Telros
Oh I see. Well, the Star Wars stage would give us a powerful military able to quickly expand across the stars with the FTL drive, whatever it may be, better kinetic/energy weapons, shields, etc, in combination with the paranoia would help fuel the nation's fall to dictatorship. Then it will be a rather aggressive, expansionist nation for a while. The technology of the Schlock would make work non-existent for the most part, as it moves to post-scarcity. Everyone could stay home and not do much, as you guys said the economy would only be focused on certain things and those jobs would only be held by so many people. Automation would become ridiculously important and allow the citizens more time to do things on their own. Many would became decadent freaks, in the initial stage, but the government would get a handle on that, somewhat, by giving them a sense of adventure in space in the military. Since they can do a lot at home and they don't need to work, they will get bored. So I imagine the nation then would become even more militaristic and expansionist, if out of boredom and wanting something to do, and constantly seeking adventure.

Thoughts, Kanuck?

Re: Question for Kanuck.

Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 7:04 pm
by Telros
*Kanuck bumpage*

Re: Question for Kanuck.

Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 2:21 am
by Telros
*lights fire under Kanuck's feet*

Kaaaaannnuuuuucccckkkk!

Re: Question for Kanuck.

Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 2:32 am
by Kanuckistan
Telros wrote:*lights fire under Kanuck's feet*

Kaaaaannnuuuuucccckkkk!

I haven't forgotten, I just haven't had time to give it proper thought. And at the moment I'm pretty tired.

Re: Question for Kanuck.

Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 2:35 am
by Telros
Just wanted to be sure. No rush.