colonial weapons

John L said:
     The problem with the oversimplification of
the design/production process is the end of 
FT as a game!	The large fleets of warships 
are created to protect the large fleets of 
civilian freighters that ply the spaceways.
If no need exists for freighters, I.E. colonies
become self sustaining after a generation or two,
trade becomes extinct and the excuse for the 
game ceased to exist.

[Tomb] I don't figure so John. Here's why: If a colony becomes self
sufficient, that means it can get by without external input. Get by, I
said, not have all the luxuries it wants. There would still be a trade
in these goods. Not have every high tech state of the world gizmo. 

And you make the large assumption that trade exists only between
immature colonies and their major powers. Look at today - England and
the US and Canada have vast trading relationships, and they aren't based
on a lack of self sufficiency (at need, I suspect any of them could be
self sufficient with a bunch of belt tightening and some rethinking). 

Trade exists in part to move goods from regions where they are cheap to
produce to regions where a demand exists. That does not stipulate you
cannot produce that good at the other end, but perhaps it isn't as
cheap. You might not choose to produce that good. But do not and could
not are not the same things. 

And you further assume that the self-sufficiency of a colony will get it
out from under the power that started it... ha ha ha! That power
probably built the colony to reap a return and to import things _it_
needs. So making the colony self sufficient is stage 1. Stage 2 is
having the colony contribute its goods back to the parent power in
exchange for a few luxuries and latest-design goods that the colony
can't (easily) produce but probably wants. 

Not all relationships in trade relate to what people need - many relate
to what people want and what people can afford. This is why St. Jon can
sell piles of new ships to those with huge drawers of unpainted lead. 

I do think that some powers may choose a colonial strategy based on the
_maintenance_ of demand for a few key resources from home... just to
keep the colonies beholden to their founding power. But this will not be
the case everywhere. 

John A said (roughly):

1) We won't have a laser rifle deployed by 2015. Taking bets their won't
be a laser rifle design that is fully operable in at least limited
operational deployment by 2015 within the USAF (even if it is in sniper
or some special service role)? In front of hundreds of witnesses, I'll
put $100 USD on it if you are a betting man. I happen to have confidence
that the energy issue will be beaten by then and the weapon design is
already tucked away. I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is.... 

2) We won't have chip fabs ever like we have mills. In matters of combat
engineering or Roman history, I'll give you credit for knowing more than
me. When it comes to chip design and fabrication technologies, I'm sorry
but I don't believe you have sufficient expertise to make that judgement
- I'm far closer (though still not an Oracle) to that environment and
the companies doing the work. I'm not saying it'll be 10 years till we
have "fab in a box, pour in sand" but modern fabs can be remarkably
small and the technologies are coming along to make them orders of
magnitude smaller. I'm not going to be around to see it, but I bet the
technology for a portable chip fab (one capable of producing something
as simple as control electronics for lasers...) will be available within
40-50 years. The pour in sand variety, if we haven't shifted entirely
from a chip-based system of electronics which is quite possible, will
likely be feasible in under 100. Maybe much sooner. No point in betting
here... but if I knew I'd be around, I'd offer you a bet here too. 

Tomb.