Research & Development

[Cralis]

Before getting into explanations, a straight reading of N6.01 is pretty clear:
EL Research Points cost X MC + Y% of TGI

_no_where_ is SL involved. An "EL" is a higher level entity then SL.

Ah, but both EL and SL projects use, at heart, the same formula to determe the RP goal for the project! <base RP> + (Level * <lvl_mod RP>). For EL it is 80 + (EL+1) * 10. For SL (and tech items) it is 20 + SL * 5. Both also use the same forumla at heart for RP cost. From a database and code standpoint it ends up be far simpler to handle both project types in a single function, with an exception to reduce the level of the EL project by one in order to get the rp costs correct (e.g., if($project == "EL") $sl--; at the top of get_rp_cost()).

The algorithms are similar, but there is a modifier to the cost based on the difference of SL from EL. But there is NO modifier for any difference of EL from EL.

EL is a broad definition of scientific knowledge. A general application. SL is a specific application that is narrowly defined. In this way EL is the top level and flows downward to SL, which is narrowed branch that is related to the EL. In any given scientific field (tech branch) the SL can be higher, equal, or lower then EL. But in no way does any SL impact EL. Nor is SL used in any definition of EL. To me it is pretty clear that the relationship flows downward only from EL to SL to tech item.

That part is, I think, adequately explained in the rules. I've never had a problem with "EL is broad, empire wide knowledge; SL is area specific knowledge that can be up to three SL above the current EL". On the other hand, that bit is what ties EL to a SL in my mind. That a branch can be SL (EL+3) at its highest implies that the EL of a race is the current SL of the EL project for that race.

Huh? SL is derived from EL, how can EL be derived from SL?

At the most you could make the argument that a race's EL is a conglomeration of all the SLs of every tech branch. That is like the "whole is made up of parts, but each part is only a fraction of the whole" statement.

Oooh could you imagine that one? What if EL was an average of all of your SLs?

But either way, I just don't understand how you think EL research could have "an SL" associated with it.

I'd say no. You aren't "restarting the project", you are continuing a delayed project. HOWEVER, upon further reading I don't see anything that specifically states that a project that falls to 0 RP is canceled (this includes not assigning an on-going project to an RDS, beginning of N5).

On the one hand, it makes sense that even though the RPs have dropped to below 10 (or to 0 for that matter) you aren't restarting the project. On the other hand, however, I can also see having it represent the loss of knowledge, and a need to start over, including the "start-up" costs for those first 10 RP.

In addition, if you are removing the project from all of your SA/RDS, you immediately drop to 0 RP for the project. In my mind, that means you would have to pay the start-up fee again if you restarted the project at a later date. Of course, the rules don't specify that is what happens ...

Agreed.

[krenshala]

That part is, I think, adequately explained in the rules. I've never had a problem with "EL is broad, empire wide knowledge; SL is area specific knowledge that can be up to three SL above the current EL". On the other hand, that bit is what ties EL to a SL in my mind. That a branch can be SL (EL+3) at its highest implies that the EL of a race is the current SL of the EL project for that race.

Huh? SL is derived from EL, how can EL be derived from SL?

I don't believe that SL is derived from EL. I believe that the EL project has a SL, and that SL is the current EL. Those two statements are not contradictory. Or are you referring to the "a branch can be SL (EL+3) at its highest"?

At the most you could make the argument that a race's EL is a conglomeration of all the SLs of every tech branch. That is like the "whole is made up of parts, but each part is only a fraction of the whole" statement.

Oooh could you imagine that one? What if EL was an average of all of your SLs?

That would be interesting.

But either way, I just don't understand how you think EL research could have "an SL" associated with it.

Because all projects have a SL ... oh, except for just this one. From the first time I've heard of using SL in GSF back when it was being developed and discussed on the list, I've always thought of the EL project as being a project who's SL was the current EL of the race. To me, at least, its just an intuitive assumption about the rules. Nothing changes because of this assumption either.

I'd say no. You aren't "restarting the project", you are continuing a delayed project. HOWEVER, upon further reading I don't see anything that specifically states that a project that falls to 0 RP is canceled (this includes not assigning an on-going project to an RDS, beginning of N5).

On the one hand, it makes sense that even though the RPs have dropped to below 10 (or to 0 for that matter) you aren't restarting the project. On the other hand, however, I can also see having it represent the loss of knowledge, and a need to start over, including the "start-up" costs for those first 10 RP.

In addition, if you are removing the project from all of your SA/RDS, you immediately drop to 0 RP for the project. In my mind, that means you would have to pay the start-up fee again if you restarted the project at a later date. Of course, the rules don't specify that is what happens ...

Agreed.

Well, because I've decided to be lazy about it, I'm going to leave my code so that the first 10 RP, regardless of how many times you've purchased them, are going to cost double. The extra fee if you somehow drop back to below 10 RP is going to be accounted for as "having to reacquire basic information about the project due to the limited (or non-existant) research information remaining from previous project work."

[krenshala]

So, after some discussions with Matt offline, I see where my thought about the EL project having a SL are, if not wrong, at least misleading. The end result, don't think of the EL project as having a SL -- think of it as being the EL project, and all the other projects costs and goals are based off of where it stands.