PBW PvK Proportions Game #2 [Archive]

PvK

July 26th, 2004, 06:12 PM

Some folks have mentioned wanting to start a new (smaller quadrant than PBW PvK Proportions Game #1) game using Proportions Mod on PBW.

A few questions come to mind, so for those who are interested in participating, let me know here if you want to play, and let me know if you have an opinion about these:

1) Would you rather I start it right away using the current Version of the mod, or wait a week, by which time I may have had time to make a new Version of the mod?

2) Do you want to start from a single homeworld, or shall I let the AI or myself run the game for a number of turns to establish some colonies and infrastructure etc., to give things a head start?

3) What rate and time limits for turns do you prefer, or can you not keep up or put up with?

4) What are your suggestions for game setting, size, etc?

My suggestions for settings, are:

Starting resources: 20000
Starting planets: 1
Home planet value: Good
Score display: Own
Technology level: Low
Racial points: 3000
Quadrant type: Custom
Quadrant size: About 2.5 colonizable systems per player.
Event frequency: Medium
Event severity: High
Technology cost: Medium
Victory conditions: No set victory conditions. Decide what your empire wants to accomplish, and try to accomplish that.
Maximum units in space: 20000 (max)
Maximum ships in space: 20000 (max)
Computer players: None
Computer difficulty: High
Computer player bonus: Medium
Neutral empires: No
Other game settings:

All warp points connected

All player planets the same size.

All tech areas allowed.

"Evenly" distributed homeworlds.

No cheat codes.

Gifts and tributes ok.

No technology gifts (send a gift ship if you need to).

Surrender not allowed (subjugation ok).

Intel projects ok.

Ruins will exist. Note that most of them will be red herrings.

No strict limits on colonization.

No saving map during game.

Simultaneous movement.

The game will upgrade to use official MM patches as they appear, and minor Proportions patches as they appear.

Proportions patches that alter balance or introduce new elements to any great degree will be up to a vote by players whether we switch to them or not.

PvK

Ragnarok-X

July 26th, 2004, 06:29 PM

nice http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Starting game: I would like to start from the beginning without the AI messing anything up http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif , i think it would be okay to wait a few more days so you can get a new patch out.

2,5 systems per player sounds VERY good !

Turntime would be 48 hours imho, but lets wait for other players.

AMF

July 26th, 2004, 06:32 PM

Can't gaurentee that I'll play, but I would only say that if you "let the AI run the game for a number of turns" then it will in part become a competition between which AI empire is better than others. This is not appealing, at least to me, for a variety of reasons. Perhaps, instead, start from turn zero but give people more than one homeworld?

Originally posted by PvK:

2) Do you want to start from a single homeworld, or shall I let the AI or myself run the game for a number of turns to establish some colonies and infrastructure etc., to give things a head start?

Ragnarok-X

July 26th, 2004, 06:38 PM

coneone alarikf, you HAVE to play http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

AMF

July 26th, 2004, 06:51 PM

You are clearly a bad influence.

Originally posted by Ragnarok-X:
coneone alarikf, you HAVE to play http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

PvK

July 26th, 2004, 06:54 PM

Yep, that would be a weakness of using the AI to start things. Another alternative would be for me to run a few turns for everyone and do the same thing for everyone - colonize the home system a bit and build a couple of shipyard bases and ferry boats.

Or, not.

I'd rather not use multiple homeworlds because it more or less divides the research cost of everything by the number of homeworlds. What I can do though is change the homeworld value to a multiple, which means everyone gets that many more base resources, without getting more research and intel points. Default Proportions is a bit stingy with resources so you can only maintain a fairly small fleet compared to the unmodded game. Turning up the homeworld and/or other planet values is a pretty easy way to tweak that.

So in response, I'd counter-suggest, for instance, doubling both the usual homeworld and new world resource values.

PvK

Ragnarok-X

July 27th, 2004, 05:24 PM

so, who else wants to join the fun ?! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Alneyan

July 27th, 2004, 07:25 PM

Yet another possibility would be to build "quasi" homeworlds in the same system as the one where your homeworld is. It would be a planet with 100% resource values, a lot of population and decent resource facilities (it would imply increasing the construction and production figures during this initial setup phase). But I gather your solution of increasing resource production and be done with it is the easiet to use.

48 hours seem fine for me as well; it may be increased later on if needed after all.

How important would be the changes brought by the new Version? Would it be a minor patch, or the next step for Proportions (or even the 3.0 Version)? If this new Version is indeed an important update, I would rather wait for it before beginning the game.

PvK

July 28th, 2004, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by Alneyan:
...
How important would be the changes brought by the new Version? Would it be a minor patch, or the next step for Proportions (or even the 3.0 Version)? If this new Version is indeed an important update, I would rather wait for it before beginning the game. Somewhere in-between, probably. Depends on how much time I get to do it, and how smoothly it goes.

Things I will include:
* Reduced cost of armored plating.
* Added vehicles to use all of the neo-standard images.
* Some adjusted starting costs.
* Extension of some techs that tend to get fully researched, to higher levels, probably with diminishing or diverse returns.

Things I might include:
* Economic adjustments.
* New weapon types.
* Adjustments to existing weapons.
* Revision of fighters and PD.
* Space-born solar rad collectors.
* Space-born laboratories.
* Space-born organic farms.
* Space-born intel labs.
* Revision of mine warfare.
* Extension of cloaking technologies.
* Further adjustment of weapon mount values.
* Use of new damage types.

PvK

Ragnarok-X

July 28th, 2004, 04:46 PM

so, why not wait ?

PvK

July 28th, 2004, 04:53 PM

No reason. We're waiting. I'll set up the game after I do the new mod Version, and my deadline for the new mod Version is this coming Monday.

PvK

AMF

July 28th, 2004, 09:05 PM

All of these sound like great ideas. Are you willing to go into more detail on your concepts for deep-space labs, organics farms, intel stations, etc...? the reason I ask is I wonder about a few things.

If I can build rad gathering stations in deep space, how many resources will they cost? Will they operate when cloaked (that woudl be weird, I think - how can I get the resources to my empire if they're cloaked, etc..) and stuff like that. It's just that this sounds like the first real implementation of the intrinsic resource/point generation capabilities that were added in Version 1.91, and as such I'm trying to get a handle on the full implications of them, especially in a generally resource-constrained enviroment that we find in Proportions...

thanks,

Alarik

Originally posted by PvK:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Alneyan:
...
How important would be the changes brought by the new Version? Would it be a minor patch, or the next step for Proportions (or even the 3.0 Version)? If this new Version is indeed an important update, I would rather wait for it before beginning the game. Somewhere in-between, probably. Depends on how much time I get to do it, and how smoothly it goes.

Things I will include:
* Reduced cost of armored plating.
* Added vehicles to use all of the neo-standard images.
* Some adjusted starting costs.
* Extension of some techs that tend to get fully researched, to higher levels, probably with diminishing or diverse returns.

Things I might include:
* Economic adjustments.
* New weapon types.
* Adjustments to existing weapons.
* Revision of fighters and PD.
* Space-born solar rad collectors.
* Space-born laboratories.
* Space-born organic farms.
* Space-born intel labs.
* Revision of mine warfare.
* Extension of cloaking technologies.
* Further adjustment of weapon mount values.
* Use of new damage types.

PvK <hr /></blockquote>

PvK

July 28th, 2004, 10:17 PM

I haven't figured out exactly what the values will be yet for the space facilities, which is why I haven't promised to include them.

The values will scale quite a bit depending on how much research you put into them. At first, they may mainly provide a way to invest mainly minerals (from construction and maintenance) in order to generate rads (solar generation) or organics (space greenhouses) or research and intel (space labs). The efficiency of this won't be very great until you invest enough research in it. The other trade-off is there will be no way to protect these with planetary shielding and the best arcs of weapon platforms, so such infrastructure will be harder to protect from raiders. On the other hand, it opens possibilities for doing things like hiding infrastructure in unexpected places, and even becoming less dependent on planets, but with significant research investment.

I think cloaking is possible, but not easy. Proportions requires scale mounts for cloaking components, so the cost scales with size, and these things are big and their main limiter is efficiency, even without expensive defenses added.

PvK

Ragnarok-X

July 29th, 2004, 03:29 PM

keep in mind ressource generating ships / non-planet-based methods will not show up the right values in the empire screen !

PvK

August 4th, 2004, 12:14 AM

Posting to update status here. I'm a bit behind schedule. I've made a bunch of new stuff, hopefully all likable. I have a bit more to do before it is ready to run, so I need to keep myself from doing more and more. I have too long a list of things I'd like to do, but it takes much longer than I'd like to actually get the right numbers figured out and entered.

To throw out a bone, here is what I've done so far:

<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Version 3.0:

--------------
New Additions:
--------------
* Added a 250 kT warship hull, called Frigate. Old Frigate renamed Corvette.
* Added a 350 kT Heavy Destroyer.
* Added a 600 kT Heavy Cruiser.
* Added a 1300 kT Heavy Dreadnought.
* Added an Express Transport (uses Tiny Transport graphic).
* Added a Huge Troop.
* Added a Large Space Station (1000 kT).
* Added a 2500 kT Large Battle Station (uses War Station graphic).
* Added a Large Starbase (3000 kT).
* Added a Massive Starbase (5000 kT).
-----------------
Gameplay Changes:
-----------------
* Reduced costs of armored plating.
* Added boarding defense strength to bridge components.
* Fleshed out Crew Quarters components with levels and abilities.
* Reduced combat penalties of computer control components.
* Extended Master Computers to tech level 10.
* Branched and extended Organic Armor technology into two types.
* Increased costs of higher-tech Gestation Vats, Medical Labs,
Climate Control Facilities, Events Predictors, Temporal Vacation
Services, Training Facilities, Crystalline Restructuring Plants,
Energy Transmission Lenses, Resource Storage, Cargo Facilities,
Mineral Scanners, Eco - Farms, Radioactives Colliders, Robotoid
Factories, Computer Complexes, Citizen Databanks, Shrines, Resource
Converters, and Ultra - Recyclers.
* Increased unhappiness from Citizen Databanks.
* Reduced effect and massively increased costs of Replicant Centers.
* Added an unhappiness effect to Replicant Centers.
* Added five more levels of Planetary Gravitational Shield Facilities
and four more levels of System Gravitational Shield Facilities and a
new tech area for them, making them available much earlier but at a
steep price.
* Massively increased costs of Value Improvement Plants and Atmospheric
Modification Plants.
* Slowed the effect of Atmospheric Modification Plants.
* Per Dogscoff's suggestion, made Resource Converters require Physics
and Biology as well as Chemistry. Also made it a deeper tree that
starts out less efficiently.
* Also per Dogscoff's suggestion, added Construction as a requirement
for Ultra - Recyclers.
--------------------------
Construction Yard Changes:
--------------------------
* Reduced organic construction rate of ship/base spaceyards by 9/10.
* Reduced radioactives construction rate of ship/base spaceyards by half.
* Added base spaceyards (Orbital Space Yard Facilities) with higher
organic construction rates, but these have high organics costs.
* Increased organics costs of colony modules from 2000 to 6000. This
doesn't change their construction rate much except on the new ship-based
spaceyards. This makes it impractical to use space-yard ships to
build colony ships at or near their destinations, instead of having
to send colony ships long distances under their own power.
* Extended Ship Yard facilities and components to 15 levels each.
-----------------
Economic Changes:
-----------------
* Raised infantry and crewed unit organics costs from 0-10 to ~25-35.
* Added 1 rad cost per kT tonnage to mechanical ground units.
* Added org costs to crew quarters.
* Added rad costs to bridge components.
* Added rad and increased other costs to Weapon Platform Command Centers.
* Increased capacity of Resource Storage facilities.
---------
Cosmetic:
---------
* Added some new system names.
* Removed all the now-unneeded Inaccessible Technology leftovers.</pre><hr /></blockquote>Stuff I really wanted to do, but haven't gotten to yet, include:

* Adjusting the starting empire costs.
* Reworking fighters at least a bit.
* Reworking mines at least a bit.

PvK

Fyron

August 4th, 2004, 12:39 AM

* Added an unhappiness effect to Replicant Centers. What sort of unhappiness effect? Build a UPC with ability 1, and it completely cancels out a negative happiness ability in the system... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif EDIT: Ok scratch that... upon testing, it seems as the abilities are working correctly in 1.91. Been a while since I played around with them... They (two facilities with planet happiness ability) even seem to be stacking now! Just make sure to note that a negative value for Planet - Change Population Happiness decreases anger levels and a postive value increases anger levels, which is exactly opposite of the system happiness ability.

* Increased organics costs of colony modules from 2000 to 6000. This
doesn't change their construction rate much except on the new ship-based
spaceyards. This makes it impractical to use space-yard ships to
build colony ships at or near their destinations, instead of having
to send colony ships long distances under their own power. Ah...

[ August 04, 2004, 00:33: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

AMF

August 4th, 2004, 12:40 AM

That all sounds sensible to me. Did you come to a decision on the space-borne resource generation ideas?

PvK

August 4th, 2004, 01:46 AM

Thanks for the tip about the backwards happiness values, Fyron!

AlarikF, no, I have a sketch for the extraplanetary generators, but I haven't gotten to them yet. I figure I should do what I need to for a good stable Version to start the proposed game with, or else I'll be adding stuff for a long time without starting the game.

PvK

Fyron

August 4th, 2004, 02:09 AM

Further info. A negative value for the ability Change Population Happiness - System never works. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif Only the planet one can cause anger to rise.

AMF

August 4th, 2004, 02:44 AM

yeah, I agree that for a change that could have far-reaching consequences, stability & testing are important...yet they remain an intriguing idea, and one that would likely not be viable until one reaches moderate levels of tech. Might I humbly suggest then that you have whatever placeholders you need to allow the players in the game to upgrade to a new Proportions mod that has them implemented once they are stable and tested sufficiently? Ie: players probably won't have them available for a while *anyways* so make the game "upgradeable" so the mod with the extraplanetary generators and the game can dovetail? Did that make sense? (and, I hope this doesn't sound like "preaching" - heck, I wouldn't know my ar** end around modding, and nobody likes a smarta**, so please do take this as a suggestion from an ardent fan of the mod...)

Meeps!

Alarik

Originally posted by PvK:
AlarikF, no, I have a sketch for the extraplanetary generators, but I haven't gotten to them yet. I figure I should do what I need to for a good stable Version to start the proposed game with, or else I'll be adding stuff for a long time without starting the game.

PvK

PvK

August 4th, 2004, 07:23 AM

Thanks again Fyron, and yeah, sigh, ah well, at least one of the two values works backwards. I think maybe I tested that way back when I put the planet unhappiness on the system fac in the older Version, and then like so many details, I forgot it. Of course, lots of little things changed with each Version of the game, so it's really nice to have a current report about it.

AlarikF, yes, it will be possible to add some things as the game goes on, as long as the players agree to add them.

PvK

se5a

August 5th, 2004, 11:49 AM

I might be interested in joining...

PvK

August 5th, 2004, 08:20 PM

Good. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

PvK

August 6th, 2004, 12:33 AM

I have created the game on PBW, titled "PvK's Proportions Game #2", so people can sign up.

Hopefully I can even finish the new mod Version tonight.

Maybe people should post the minimum number of players they feel we should have before we start the game, too.

PvK

Hippocrates

August 6th, 2004, 01:33 AM

Count me in!

However, I wouldn't mind seeing a slightly larger map than what's described - I like a bit of room to explore and offer strategic depth http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Still, I'll go with whatever you decide.
Can't wait to try out the new mod changes!

-Hippo

PvK

August 6th, 2004, 01:57 AM

Cool. I am thinking basically everyone will be 4 warp jumps from almost everyone else. This means everyone will have two adjacent colonizable systems, and one colonizable system that is equa-distant from other players, two warp jumps away. However there may be some non-colonizable systems, systems with just one planet, etc., to give weird maneuver and exploration options, and maybe some very distant systems people could go for too, with some planets, but mainly everyone will have pretty good access to most or all other players and the easily available planets, so there will be plenty of opportunity for conflict.

This is a counterpoint to PvK Proportions Game #1, where the map is large and several nations have no access at all to others without travelling very long distances through each others' space, and everyone had several systems they could colonize. I actually really like the map we got in many ways, with its seas of no connections, the weird Krsqk cluster hidden in the corner with only one quadrant-spanning connection to the far corner, and so on, but it definitely "slowed" interaction between players, which I think has a lot to do with why we had so many drop-outs, and why it's been as peaceful as it has.

Anyway, comments and requests are welcome.

PvK

PvK

August 6th, 2004, 01:58 AM

Here are my notes on the empire cost changes in 3.0:

<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">
--------------------
Empire Cost Changes:
--------------------
* Lowered value of "Advanced Power Conservation" to 900 points.
* Lowered value of "Supply Guzzlers" to -700 points.
* Lowered value of "Natural Merchants" to 1500 points.
* Renamed "Propulsion Experts" to "Transcendental Navigation" with a new
description, since it has a bizarre disproportionate effect.
* Added a new "Propulsion Experts" trait, which is a new racial tech
area that provides better propulsion components.
* Renamed "Mechanoids" to "Plague Immune" and dropped cost to 400 points.
* Physical Strength values lowered.
* Intelligence costs tweaked. "Dumb" races get more points back.
* Cunning adjusted per PvK Balance Mod.
* Happiness and Environmental Resistance values slashed, but Happiness
ranges increased, in light of research into lack of effect of racial
Happiness.
* Reproduction maximum increased. Now limited only by cost.
* Aggressiveness and Defensiveness adjusted per PvK Balance Mod.
* Political Savvy adjusted per PvK Balance Mod.
* Resource extraction aptitudes left as in Proportions 2.5.3.1.
* Construction Aptitude adjusted per PvK Balance Mod, except positive
threshold. Also extended allowed minimum range to 25.
* Repair Aptitude adjusted per PvK Balance Mod, with increased min and
max values.
* Maintenance Aptitude left as is, because it uses SJ's base-100 system.
</pre><hr /></blockquote>PvK

Ragnarok-X

August 6th, 2004, 03:04 PM

Nice PvK !

About the fighters: Just increase the hull cost by a few minerals or whatever, that will make it harder to mass them !

PvK

August 6th, 2004, 06:04 PM

I'm aware of the fighter issue, and have something in the works, but it's not done yet. I figure it would be best to get it in before starting, so it may be Monday before it's ready, as I have other tasks I need to do today and this weekend.

I more or less agree with your comments on the fighters in 2.5. They are too good too early, meaning fleets should bring interceptors with them, etc. It worked sort of on a World War II or modern naval air analogy (or Star Wars, or Battlestar Galactica, or...), but that does mean mostly requiring fighters to deal with other fighters.

My current approach is to slash the combat modifiers they start with, and move the availability of higher-powered weapons to higher tech levels. So the first fighters you can get are more like armed shuttlecraft, - auxiliary weapons that can help but that can also be dealt with by ships. The higher tech levels will still be quite strong, but by those tech levels, ships have better combat mods and defenses available too, and the higher-tech fighter components will also cost more. Also, since there will be a greater change in performance with technology, amassing fighters during periods of peace should be less effective, since the older fighters should be outmatched by newer models. That's the theory - I think I can come close to pulling it off, but it will take some effort.

I'm already doing the fighter/bomber split - I'm not sure what the torpedo bomber distinction would be, unless you mean planet-only or planet/ship weapons opposed to ship-only weapons. That's already in there.

PvK

Fyron

August 6th, 2004, 08:33 PM

More testing on planet happiness ability:

I built a faciltiy with -20 planet happiness. The planet quickly dropped to angry mood, never below. Then I built one with +10, nothing changed for 10 turns of waiting. I built a second +10, nothing changed very fast. Then I built a third +10, and the mood increased quickly.

This confirms that facilities with the planet happiness ability stack with each other. You can build two of the same facility for double the effect. A negative facility and a positive facility add together, not one replaces the other. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Note that for the system happiness ability, only the best ability in the system is used.

[ August 06, 2004, 19:48: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

PvK

August 6th, 2004, 09:32 PM

Amazing! I was just thinking about exactly what you just researched, like one minute before I got to your post!

That's very very useful - thanks!

PvK

csebal

August 7th, 2004, 01:56 AM

MMM.. proportions v3.0 sounds like fun http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

BTW: about fighters, they really are an overkill, the cost virtually nothing to own, and a squad of 50 fighters (easily carried on two destroyers) can destroy entire fleets, even if they have some PD.

I would love to see them soemwhat weekened in the next Version http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Maybe you could specialize fighters, into three different types (interceptor, bomber, torpedo bomber) using the allowed target types of weapons.

May not really make fighters any weaker, but it'll certainly make them less universal.

ATM Fighters equipped with guns can tear apart just about anything

Ragnarok-X

August 7th, 2004, 08:34 AM

Minor question: I just thought about uploading my empire file, but then i remembered that the changelog shows a increase/decrease of racial point cost for certain abilities. So i cant really upload my empire file until the patch is ready, yes ?

Alneyan

August 7th, 2004, 09:18 AM

You cannot indeed, unless you are willing to do the maths yourself and check whether your Empire will be valid after the next patch. It is only when PvK will add our Empire files that they will be checked against his Version, and Empires having used too many points will not work.

Ragnarok-X

August 7th, 2004, 08:05 PM

just what i thought.

PvK, hurry http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

PvK

August 7th, 2004, 10:15 PM

Ok, I'm hurryin' ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

New Version should be available in the next couple of days. Pardon the delay.

PvK

PvK

August 9th, 2004, 02:26 PM

Ok, the new patch Version should be available today. I seem to have caused a bug or two that needs to be hammered out, but that shouldn't take long.

We have nine players signed up! And I don't even see Dogscoff, Alarikf, or JLS listed!

Shall I try to scare some people away? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif I probably should give fair warning, that it may be a long game, and it would be best if we have players who are committed for a long time, because it would be best if we don't end up with a bunch of AI's.

I am thinking I will adjust the map by hand for the type of map described earlier, and then not actually play myself, until perhaps we have an intact empire that someone abandons, and no one replaces. That will help keep the empires under human control, give me a handicap, and balance against the knowledge advantage I'd have from being the map creator.

PvK

Ragnarok-X

August 9th, 2004, 04:02 PM

Long games are no problem with me. But i really hope each player joins the game with the same responsibilty. Because it majorly suc*s if all 20 turns or somehting a player leaves, it somehow distrupts the entire games feeling !

Ed Kolis

August 9th, 2004, 06:06 PM

I've been in "P&N on PBW take 2" for what, almost 3 years now? Granted we only average around a turn a week, but I rarely miss any, given that I rarely go out of town or do anything weird like that... pretty much only time I miss a turn is when my computer crashes http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

The question is, after all these new games I'm joining, will I have time for SE5??? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/shock.gif

PvK

August 10th, 2004, 03:21 AM

Speaking of delays, I need one more day for the mod release, as I found some things I must fix before you guys make empires. But it's really close, so it really should be out tomorrow. Meanwhile, here is my latest change list:

Code:<hr /><pre>
Version 3.0:

--------------
New Additions:
--------------
* Added a 250 kT warship hull, called Frigate. Old Frigate renamed Corvette.
* Added a 350 kT Heavy Destroyer.
* Added a 600 kT Heavy Cruiser.
* Added a 1300 kT Juggernaut.
* Added three sizes of Utility Station (uses Resource Base graphic).

* Added an Express Transport (uses Tiny Transport graphic).
* Added a Bomber (uses Huge Fighter graphic).
* Added a Heavy Bomber (uses Massive Fighter graphic).
* Added a Huge Troop.
* Added a Large Space Station (1000 kT).
* Added a 2500 kT Large Battle Station (uses War Station graphic).
* Added a Large Starbase (3000 kT).
* Added a Massive Starbase (5000 kT).
* Added some random events (mostly minor).
-----------------
Gameplay Changes:
-----------------
* Reduced costs of armored plating.
* Added boarding defense strength to bridge components.
* Fleshed out Crew Quarters components with levels and abilities.
* Reduced combat penalties of computer control components.
* Extended Master Computers to tech level 10.
* Branched and extended Organic Armor technology into two types.
* Increased costs of higher-tech Gestation Vats, Medical Labs,
Climate Control Facilities, Events Predictors, Temporal Vacation
Services, Training Facilities, Crystalline Restructuring Plants,
Energy Transmission Lenses, Resource Storage, Cargo Facilities,
Mineral Scanners, Eco - Farms, Radioactives Colliders, Robotoid
Factories, Computer Complexes, Citizen Databanks, Shrines, Resource
Converters, and Ultra - Recyclers.
* Increased unhappiness from Citizen Databanks.
* Reduced effect and massively increased costs of Replicant Centers.
* Added an unhappiness effect to Replicant Centers.
* Added five more levels of Planetary Gravitational Shield Facilities
and four more levels of System Gravitational Shield Facilities and a
new tech area for them, making them available much earlier but at a
steep price.
* Massively increased costs of Value Improvement Plants and Atmospheric
Modification Plants.
* Slowed the effect of Atmospheric Modification Plants.
* Per Dogscoff's suggestion, made Resource Converters require Physics
and Biology as well as Chemistry. Also made it a deeper tree that
starts out less efficiently.
* Also per Dogscoff's suggestion, added Construction as a requirement
for Ultra - Recyclers.
* Split technologies previously under "Shields" into "Shields",
"Phased Shields", and "Shield Regeneration" (and the new
"Gravitational Shields" tech area mentioned above). The various
branches require research in basic "Shields" to level 3.
* Shields generators and regenerators extended to higher levels.
* Increased research cost of Starliner Modules.
* Increased research cost of Massive Base Ship Construction.
* Added Stealth Armor tech requirement to Stealth Structure.
* Added Reflective Alloys tech requirement to Scattering Structure.
* Added Emissive Armor tech requirement to Emissive Armored Structure.
* Removed Fighter technology from carrier hulls - reworked carrier
tech level requirements.
* Split Mines technology into mine and sweeper trees, and made major
changes to minefield statistics.
----------------
Fighter Changes:
----------------
* Rate of fire of all fighter weapons halved.
* Added Fighter Propulsion tech area, starting with Chemical Thrusters.
* Removed supply storage from most fighter engines.
* Added Fighter Power Plant (supply) components.
* Increased fighter supply use per turn from 5 to 50.
* Increased fighter engine supply use per sector.
* Due to the above two, fighter range in-system is now severely limited.
* Increased fighter weapons' supply use.
* Stretched some fighter weapon tech requirements, adding some levels.
* Changed fighter propulsion to a one-component-per-fighter system, to
allow combat modifiers to be more firmly based on maneuverability.
--------------------------
Construction Yard Changes:
--------------------------
* Reduced organic construction rate of ship/base spaceyards by 9/10.
* Reduced radioactives construction rate of ship/base spaceyards by half.
* Added base spaceyards (Orbital Space Yard Facilities) with higher
organic construction rates, but these have high organics costs.
* Added Organic Space Yard under Organic Manipulation tech tree, with
higher organic build rate than is available under ordinary tech tree.
* Increased organics costs of colony modules from 2000 to 6000. This
doesn't change their construction rate much except on the new ship-based
spaceyards. This makes it impractical to use space-yard ships to
build colony ships at or near their destinations, instead of having
to send colony ships long distances under their own power.
* Extended Space Yard facilities and components to 15 levels each.
--------------------
Empire Cost Changes:
--------------------
* Lowered value of "Advanced Power Conservation" to 900 points.
* Lowered value of "Supply Guzzlers" to -700 points.
* Lowered value of "Natural Merchants" to 1500 points.
* Renamed "Propulsion Experts" to "Transcendental Navigation" with a new
description, since it has a bizarre disproportionate effect.
* Added a new "Propulsion Experts" trait, which is a new racial tech
area that provides better propulsion components.
* Renamed "Mechanoids" to "Plague Immune" and dropped cost to 400 points.
* Physical Strength values lowered.
* Intelligence costs tweaked. "Dumb" races get more points back.
* Cunning adjusted per PvK Balance Mod.
* Happiness and Environmental Resistance values slashed, but Happiness
ranges increased, in light of research into lack of effect of racial
Happiness.
* Reproduction maximum increased. Now limited only by cost.
* Aggressiveness and Defensiveness adjusted per PvK Balance Mod.
* Political Savvy adjusted per PvK Balance Mod.
* Resource extraction aptitudes left as in Proportions 2.5.3.1.
* Construction Aptitude adjusted per PvK Balance Mod, except positive
threshold. Also extended allowed minimum range to 25.
* Repair Aptitude adjusted per PvK Balance Mod, with increased min and
max values.
* Maintenance Aptitude left as is, because it uses SJ's base-100 system.
-----------------
Economic Changes:
-----------------
* Raised infantry and crewed unit organics costs from 0-10 to ~25-35.
* Added 1 rad cost per kT tonnage to mechanical ground units.
* Added org costs to crew quarters.
* Added rad costs to bridge components.
* Added rad and increased other costs to Weapon Platform Command Centers.
* Increased capacity of Resource Storage facilities.
* Added org costs to training facilities.
* Increased Base maintenance reduction from 50% to 73%.
* Changed Cultural Centers to one-per-homeworld facilities
which multiply production of facilities there by many times.
This allows players to develop and customize their homeworlds
to focus and embelish production, etc.
---
UI:
---
* Moved efficient scanners and ECM before most powerful models, so that
the design screen's Upgrade function (and the AI) will choose the more
powerful models over the efficient ones.
---------
Cosmetic:
---------
* Added some new system names.
* Removed all the now-unneeded Inaccessible Technology leftovers.
* Corrected MM typo in Planet Utilization description.
* Rearranged positions of various components to group them together in
the design interface.
* Added some images from on Dogscoff's Neo-Standard page.
</pre><hr />

csebal

August 10th, 2004, 04:36 AM

Erm... sounds good.

PvK, i don't really know if its a known issue or not, but i feel a bit odd about the planetary defenses in proportions. Since the beginning to be honest.

With the extreme ammount of cargo space you have on your homeworld, and the range bonus on the weapon platform mounts, its easily possible to build defenses, the enemy will never get trough.

This wouldnt be much of a problem in itself, but as the defense platforms cost nothing to maintain and the ships cost a lot, its questionable you'll ever have an army large enough to survive even the first round of planetary defense fire.

Fighters / missiles just hit an invisible wall about 2 squares away from the planet, so they are not an alternative either.

I guess you've tought about that as well, i just would like to know, if its an unwanted side effect, or in fact you intended homeworlds to be this strong. (btw: the 15-20k shield - depending on homeworld size) make the planet strong in itself, without any defenses.

PvK

August 10th, 2004, 01:09 PM

Good question csebal.

This was partly done for counterpoint. In the unmodded game, an artificially low limit on planet capacity ("Sorry - _planet_ "full"!") results in planetary defenses being incapable of fighting off a fairly large fleet. So it both makes sense and offers a new situation.

In theory yes it is possible to put an enormous amount of units on a planet with a breathable planet - particularly the homeworld.

In practice, there may be a very large number of units on important planets, and it makes sense to take advantage of this to protect them. However, there is not a stalemate situation except potentially with a human defending against the AI (due to its weaknesses).

One simple reason it's not a stalemate is that you don't have to fight the weapon platforms if you have your ships not fire on planets. The planet is then blockaded, and this can effectively remove even a homeworld from effective contribution to an empire.

Also, in practice, it's very expensive and time-consuming to build fleet-stopping defenses. In the time it takes to build them up, they become less and less up-to-date, too. It's usually a better strategy to concentrate on mobile forces and economic development, with just enough defences to prevent your planets from being snatched by cheap raiding forces.

Finally, there are weapons which can overcome even a formidably defended homeworld. Planetary weapons do huge amounts of damage, and there are shield-skipping and shield-depleting weapons which can still overwhelm a powerful planet... but it's generally risky and expensive, which is how I intended.

One vital tip is to scout first - send ships to view the defenses before assaulting. Also, custom anti-planet designs can help - expendable with cheap components (no expensive sensors, top-end engines, or elite crews) but lots of cheap armor and effective anti-planet weapons are good choices.

PvK

PvK

August 10th, 2004, 03:23 PM

This game on PBW is full with 12 players. I've therefore created a PvK's Proportions Game #3 in case there are more, and/or for players who would rather play in a game with fewer than 12 players.

Lots of players is nice in some ways, but also can lead to longer time between turns, and is more likely for someone to drop out.

PvK

PvK

August 10th, 2004, 11:56 PM

Ok, there is a 3.0 preview posted HERE (http://g2.latibulum.com/pvk/proportions/Proportions3.0preview.zip). With it, you can create empires for this game, and check out the changes. I will probably make another Last-minute change or two and you guys might catch some things, but this is more or less it and I'm confident the empire selection will not change, so you should be able to create empires using this.

Let me know if you have any suggestions or spot any problems.

Thanks,

PvK

Hippocrates

August 11th, 2004, 01:26 AM

Hey PvK,

The new mod looks great! Several of the new changes enhance that "epic" feel which makes Proportions such a great mod. Thanks for all the work you've once again put into it.

The only new change I'm not such a big fan of is the new fighter weapon firing rate. Although fighters in 2.x were powerful early on, by the time players researched armor plating and the later levels of shield tech, fighters have a hard time punching through these layered defenses.

In 3.0, fighter costs seem to have increased (making it less likely to mass produce so many fighters in a short period of time), they have now become much more of a tactical weapon with their lower supply limits, and the reworked shield values makes them less survivable. These changes are great. However, by halving the firing rates, I fear that fighters may become unable to inflict enough damage over time to justify their use. At the very least, by firing energy weapons only once every 2 turns they lose a lot of their value as "anti-fighter" interceptors.

Perhaps it would be possible to half firing rates on torps and such, but leave energy weapons as they were? Or perhaps, early Versions of a weapon could fire slower than later levels of the same weapon. I don't know if this is even possible, but can mounts be modded to effect firing rates? If so, you could create an "interceptor" mount - which would not be usable on the new bomber sizes - which could let the smaller fighters retain their value as interceptors by allowing them to fire every turn with low powered fighter energy weapons.

Aside from that, I think the new changes are great!

Thanks,
-Hippo

PvK

August 11th, 2004, 03:56 AM

Hi Hippo - thanks for the feedback! Pardon my rambling reply, but it's late and I'm tired.

The main purposes of the fighter changes are:

* Remove their power vs. ships in early-game. You used to be able to get Fighter Level I, some DUC tech, and mass some fighters for a pretty good anti-ship force if the enemy didn't have fighters themselves. I think this is well taken care of, even without the ROF reduction you're concerned about.

* Increase the diversity, interest and depth of the fighter tree, so there are various options and they can be viable weapons in late game, but only if they are researched to high levels. They should also improve fairly constantly with research, so stockpiled peacetime fighters will be meaningfully out-of-date compared to new purchases. Again, I hope I've managed this, and again, ya it doesn't need the lowered ROF.

* Change role of most fighters to tactical rather than strategic. The supply limits tend to remove or greatly limit their ability to be used without carriers, as they were in 2.5, where they could for example be massed at warp points without a carrier. Again, not related to ROF.

The more relevant part:

* Reduce the ability of "anti-fighter" weapons to blow away lots of ships quickly, with enough fighters. While I think Proportions 2.5 fighters are ok on this score when everything's taken into account, I also notice the frequent feedback that a large number of fighters with common anti-fighter weapons like DUCs, MBs, APBs, can bLast a large number of ships even if they have a good amount of PD. Doing the math, you could put 2-3 such weapons on a not-so-high-tech 2.5 fighter, and then a few dozen of them could add up a lot of damage and be hard to hit. You're right that high-tech well-designed 2.5 ships can hold their own on a cost basis if using shields and armor, but it was still quite a strong technique. Although I have addressed much of that in other ways, I thought I wanted to reduce the damage these weapons could do to ships, but not have to divide down the damage to the point that the weapons started being hard to tell apart. Halving ROF keeps the weapon damage relationships to each other, while reducing the damage to ships (except for the first volley, which remains as strong). To keep fighter-vs-fighter damage strong enough, I greatly reduced the damage capacity of fighters by changing the shields to deflectors (as you saw) and also reducing the structure Ratings of many of the components (I was thinking of reducing the weapon structure a lot too, but didn't get to that). Someone some months ago suggested using higher ROF, with the idea it could represent the time taken for fighters to maneuver onto a new target, and at first I resisted that, and still am not sure I entirely like it, but I thought it was worth a try for the reasons I just mentioned.

I have been so busy with this that I have only briefly tested the results. I think it could use a bunch of testing to see how it really turns out in practice. It's a lot more complex than before, because there are many more levels of fighter tech, and more possible designs, and I'm not sure how they might tend to encounter different ship tech levels. It will no doubt need some tweaks.

I do know that the first fighters available will now stink. They'll be like a goofy shuttlecraft with one weapon attached launched to distract the enemy and get killed. But the higher tech fighters get to be just as respectable, or more, than the 2.5 fighters... except for the ROF change.

A good testing niche is probably to look for fighters that can avoid PD easily and still mount 2-3 Meson BLasters and have supplies to fire them a lot (say 50-75 supplies).

Oh, and I had some Point Defense changes I meant to make but didn't put in yet. That will also affect the other half of the above thought problem, which is, by the time you can get those fighters without neglecting other stuff too much, how advanced are typical enemy ships? That's going to take a bit to figure out, and also depend a bit on what I do to the PDC.

In sum, I think your concern is on-target, but I don't know yet if it hits the mark! Needs testing!

(I don't think mounts can reduce ROF, but yes it is an idea to have higher-tech weapons have lower ROF.)

Time for sleep... I hope that was coherent enough. Thanks again for the feedback!

PvK

csebal

August 11th, 2004, 05:45 PM

I did some data file digging to see how the new proportions changes affected my favorite tools.

Some things i noticed that doest seem to be right
04-08-11 20.30GMT
- Unlike stated in the preview changelog, the organic / radioactive contruction speed of ALL spaceyard (the planetary ones as well) got halved compared to the previous Versions.
- The above change may cause an issue with the build times of colonial improvements, especially the high end ones, which cost enormous ammounts of organics / radioactives, as well as minerals. So their build time is effectively doubled this way.

I know its not the final Version, then again, bringing it up can do no harm.

-------------
EDIT:
I dont even know where to start.

First of all, with the preview Version, i was able to get 65-70k research on a single medium sized homeworld by turn 24, 80k mineral production by turn 36, and 110k research by turn 70.

This is because the complexes / megaplexes are far too easy to access.

The fighter movement system is beyond my understanding. A Fighter engine x 1 , which by description gives 6 standard movement points allows my fighter to move 1! square every turn. Other than that, it looks consequent to be honest. The combat movement is 1/6 of whats specified in the description, but somehow i doubt it that this is the way it was meant to work

The description of cities / metropolis facilities and such can be confusing in some cases. Megalopolis for example states, that it gives 400 research, but in reality it only gives 200 and 100% research bonus for the planet. This can mean much when building on planets with cultural centers, as those give far higher research bonuses. In such a case, building a research megaplex, which gives 300 research without any modifiers is better than building a metropolis, as the latter only gives 200 points, and as far i know its research bonus does not stack with that of the colony world.

The tonnage space cost of some fighter engines seems to be mistyped. The one i noticed to be wrong was Small Chemical thruster III x 3, which was 8kT instead of 6kT

All in one, the mod look really good (i especially like the way cultural centers are done), but it definitely needs some more love http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Well, thats it for tonight. Hope it helps
csebal

PvK

August 11th, 2004, 10:32 PM

...
- Unlike stated in the preview changelog, the organic / radioactive contruction speed of ALL spaceyard (the planetary ones as well) got halved compared to the previous Versions.

Essentially true. I neglected to mention that when I mentioned that radioactives rate was also halved. The build rates in general though also can be researched, in theory, up to 50% higher than in 2.5.

- The above change may cause an issue with the build times of colonial improvements, especially the high end ones, which cost enormous ammounts of organics / radioactives, as well as minerals. So their build time is effectively doubled this way.

More or less, except for the availability of more powerful space yards. The high end colonial improvements however are also now hugely more powerful to have than they used to be, because of their multipliers on planetary output (mainly mineral and research).

...
First of all, with the preview Version, i was able to get 65-70k research on a single medium sized homeworld by turn 24, 80k mineral production by turn 36, and 110k research by turn 70.

This is because the complexes / megaplexes are far too easy to access.

Ok... this probably needs to be reduced... at least the research aspect. I think I need to reduce the multipliers and increase the base output of the cultural center, and as you say, take another look at the complex/megaplex time. I thought it'd take at least a bit longer to build those up.

The fighter movement system is beyond my understanding. A Fighter engine x 1 , which by description gives 6 standard movement points allows my fighter to move 1! square every turn. Other than that, it looks consequent to be honest. The combat movement is 1/6 of whats specified in the description, but somehow i doubt it that this is the way it was meant to work

I mentioned that low-tech fighters were weak. Research a bit of Fighter Propulsion tech.
Consequent? I don't understand.
It is 2 standard MP per move for every 5 kT of fighter mass, so yes a Small Fighter goes one for every 6 points of standard movement.

The description of cities / metropolis facilities and such can be confusing in some cases. Megalopolis for example states, that it gives 400 research, but in reality it only gives 200 and 100% research bonus for the planet. This can mean much when building on planets with cultural centers, as those give far higher research bonuses. In such a case, building a research megaplex, which gives 300 research without any modifiers is better than building a metropolis, as the latter only gives 200 points, and as far i know its research bonus does not stack with that of the colony world.

Yes, the descriptions for those facilities take into account their own multiplier, and assume it is the highest multiplier present. If I'd taken time to think about it longer, I might have realized I needed to re-write the descriptions to be clearer. I've been rushing to get this done, so that came out confusing, and it is a bit odd when you build one on a homeworld, or where there is a larger city. On the other hand, it does make sense for them to have diminishing effect where they are overshadowed by a larger cultural presence. The description should be reworded though, and perhaps the numbers re-considered. That ought to take me a few hours thought and cut & paste... hmm...

The tonnage space cost of some fighter engines seems to be mistyped. The one i noticed to be wrong was Small Chemical thruster III x 3, which was 8kT instead of 6kT

Thanks - good catch. I think the others are as intended, but there are some interesting values. This is mainly to offer some variety and slightly more interesting choices to make. e.g.:
* Small Chemical Thruster I's, Small Contra - Terrene Engines and Small Quantum Engines are 2 kT in size but give only 1 kT structure each.
* Small Jacketed Photon Engines are smaller than others, and have less structure, and the values are a little peculiar but are as intended. The single-system is 1/1, whereas multiple engines are 1/1 + 1/0.

All in one, the mod look really good (i especially like the way cultural centers are done), but it definitely needs some more love http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Well, thats it for tonight. Hope it helps
csebal

Yes, thanks very much!

PvK

PvK

August 13th, 2004, 12:20 AM

...First of all, with the preview Version, i was able to get 65-70k research on a single medium sized homeworld by turn 24, 80k mineral production by turn 36, and 110k research by turn 70.
...

Ok, I set up a sreadsheet to get a handle on this, and see what's going on.

I'll be re-working the Cultural Center numbers. Looking at a release by this coming monday. Looks like I will be giving the Cultural Center a hefty intrinsic research value, and lowering the research multiplier a lot. Maybe some of that too for the resource multipliers. And the research requirements for megaplex III's will be getting a second look, too. If I get time, I may standardize the text description of all the cultural facility production numbers.

(Actually, it looks to me like SE4 is also doing some slightly weird math with the modifiers, but that's not that important. Mainly, I just hadn't done all the math to check the final numbers I had in.)

PvK

csebal

August 13th, 2004, 03:35 AM

If there is anything i can help you with to speed up the release of 3.0, let me know. (ICQ#8876653)

btw: spotted another one:
Minor City
Code:<hr /><pre>Ability 4 Type := Point Generation - Research
Ability 4 Descr := Generates 26 research points each turn.
Ability 4 Val 1 := 13
...
Ability 17 Type := Planet Point Generation Modifier - Research
Ability 17 Val 1 := 15</pre><hr />
This only gives the building about 14 research points (assuming SE4 is handling these modifiers correctly)

City
Code:<hr /><pre>Ability 4 Type := Point Generation - Research
Ability 4 Descr := Generates 52 research points each turn.
Ability 4 Val 1 := 13
...
Ability 17 Type := Planet Point Generation Modifier - Research
Ability 17 Val 1 := 25</pre><hr />
Same as above, only with 25%, which gives 16.25pts instead of 52

oh, before i forget:
i would also give these buildings some intel bonus, especially the cultural centers.

What about 2000 base research / 100 base intel for cultural centers, with an added modifier of 10x to both research and intel.

This would leave a base value of 20k research / 1k intel, plus any research / intel buildings you may place on the homeworld, giving an average of 25k research (with 5 research labs)

Down from that, you could have
500% research / intel on colony world cc
200% research / intel on arcology
150% on megalopolis
100% on metropolis
75% on major spaceport cities (which should have increased costs compared to major cities)
50% on major cities
35% on spaceport cities (which again should have a cost between city and major city)
25% on cities
20% on minor spaceport cities (+price increase)
15% on minor cities
8% on colonial communities

What do u think?

PvK

August 13th, 2004, 09:29 PM

Thanks - those two do look like typos. What I get for rushing.

I don't have ICQ where I am at the moment.

I will be changing the homeworld CC to something in the neighborhood of what you suggested. My Last guess was HW CC would provide 1000 research and a 10x research multiplier. By my math, trying to take what SE4 actually does into account (assuming happy and later jubilent happiness, and use of a system computer complex eventually), this gives about 21000 research to start with, and has the potential to grow to about 106640 if you filled your whole homeworld with Research Megaplex III's. With only half-filled, research would be about 61070. I may tweak that a bit, though.

As for the other values you listed, they are pretty close to what currently exists.

The spaceport cities costs and abilities are more or less the same as their corresponsing city... plus a spaceport and resupply depot. I give them a minor side-effect boost on research, but I don't see why their research bonus should any better than the same size city, plus a point or two.

I'm also not sure why a city would provide an intel multiplier. It seems to me like a civilian community presents intel challenges as much or as or more than it would help. Did you have a rationale in mind for that?

PvK

PvK

August 14th, 2004, 12:57 AM

Ok, I think I've found good values for the homeworld research:

Cultural Center research multiplier x 10
Cultural Center research generation 1000 (x 10)

This gives a starting research base of 21000.

If half the remaining (medium) homeworld slots are devoted to research Megacomplex III's, this gives a research generation of about 61000. If you fill the HW with research megaplex III's, the generation base reaches about 107,000, but of course at a huge cost in resources and lost income.

This potential is offset by reduced trade value compared to 2.5 (20% -> 10%), the resource sacrifice, the increased research costs in 3.0, and now, tweaked research and construction costs for the megaplexes.

My impression is this is about right. Let me know if this seems off to anyone.

I'm not so certain what to do about the mineral generation. My inclination is to leave it at 30x, or maybe drop it to 20-25x. At 30x, you start at about 45-50K mins, and can increase that eventually to about 200K without concentrating homeworld slots, or go up to about 500K if you dump everything else and fill up on Min Mine Megaplex III's.

Seems ok to me. But again, if this seems off, speak now. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

I am thinking though that these multipliers will mean we don't need to double the resource values of planets, as we'd discussed earlier in this thread.

PvK

Fyron

August 14th, 2004, 03:14 AM

(Actually, it looks to me like SE4 is also doing some slightly weird math with the modifiers, but that's not that important. Mainly, I just hadn't done all the math to check the final numbers I had in.)

Not sure if this is it, but a system percent modifier ability stacks with a planet percent modifier ability. If you build a stock game robotoid factory III and system robotoid factory III, you do not get an overall 60% bonus, but instead a 69% bonus.

csebal

August 14th, 2004, 06:10 AM

Hippocrates

August 14th, 2004, 09:26 AM

Hey PvK,

I like the starting base numbers, but I feel that the higher end numbers you mentioned may be a bit high. Under 2.5 using a computer complex III, robotoid factory III, and system facilities III, the HW would cap out at about 95-100k mineral production and 45k research. These numbers werer large enough to make the homeworld the singlemost vuluable planet in any empire. By increasig these numbers to the potential described above, HW's would now eclipse any colony world, and would be quite capable of standing on their own.

I'm kind of grogy right now - can't think of a good arguement. However, I like proportions for its "epic" feel - slow construction, looooong research times, etc. A homeworld as powerful as you describe just seems a bit off to me.

Thanks,
-Hippo

csebal

August 14th, 2004, 12:32 PM

Do not forget, that the colony worlds now also get a nice research / mining boost from cities / metropolises and the like.

So one arcology on a planet gives a 200% research rate bonus, effectively resulting in 3x the normal research that planet would give.

Well, taking a closer look at it, you will probably not have that many arcologies, because of the time it takes to build them, but the potential is there.

Fyron

August 14th, 2004, 12:35 PM

The next highest building, a colony world cultural center would take 533 turns at the same build rate.

Actually, I am pretty sure PvK removed those from being feasible in an earlier Version, but left them in to maintain savegame compatibility. They are not meant to be built normally any longer, so they have the same build cost as the normal cultural centers.

Ed Kolis

August 14th, 2004, 01:53 PM

So I suppose the CWCC's can be safely taken out now, as the 2.X savegames won't be compatible with the new 3.X savegames? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Hippocrates

August 14th, 2004, 02:58 PM

Hey csebal,

That's partly the point - I liked the slower pace http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
I always felt that the stock game allowed or the generation of too many minerals and reserach points too quickly. I'm just pointing out that I hope the new values don't "speed things up" a manner drasticaly faster than 2.5 (I found the pacing there exquisite).

-Hippo

csebal

August 14th, 2004, 03:41 PM

Well, i like the slower pace as well, but i dont see a point in having anything in the game that costs 200+ turns to build, even with the highest tech available.

I just mentioned, that there is a reasonable timeframe for constructing buildings, and they should all fit into that timeframe using the tech level players will most probably have by the time they are supposed to use the building.

See, if a metropolis takes 50 turns to build with top level construction facilities, then and i dont think many will build it, not to mention, that by the time you'll have that top level construction stuff, you could/should care about arcologies instead.

So lets make it clear, i dont want to make things build in a turn or a year, but i dont see a point in having my facility list cluttered with stuff, that takes so long, se5 comes out by the time it gets even near completion.

Thats my point.
Then again, there are two other aspects:
- First, i realize that im just one of the many Users of this mod, so my opinion weights little on the global scale.
- Then there is the 2nd Proportions game on PBW, which i would really like to begin ASAP, so it may not be the time to make ground breaking changes to the mod.

Lets just say, i keep throwing up ideas and comments like this hoping, that they help to make the mod better. Arguing about it can make the mod better as well, as it gives PvK more opinions to base his choices on.

Thats it on my side.

csebal

August 14th, 2004, 03:49 PM

I kinda like the idea of CWCCs, they are the Last step of making a new planet truly part of my culture for me.

As for myself, i always modded my own proportions, to make CWCC the Last colonial step after arcology, with a cost of 650k resources, and somewhat reduced stats to be in-line with the cost/stats of other facilities.

I think CWCCs could stay in 3.0 as well, but they should have lower cost and lower stats. They could be given the same tech reqs as arcologies, with higher construction and industry levels

PvK

August 14th, 2004, 06:28 PM

Thanks very much to all of you for your enthusiastic comments and questions and suggestions on the mod! It's very nice, and I do appreciate both cheers and frowns. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

It seems to be about time for me to re-state some of the reasons for the values of the large cultural facilities.

In 3.0 there are two kinds of Cultural Center, homeworld and colony. In 2.5 there were as well, but they were identical except in name. In 3.0, the colony Version costs a lot less (2.4 million x 3 types) while the homeworld Version costs 4 million x 3 types, and has even better values.

As in earlier Versions, these costs are so high because you are NOT supposed to consider building them, unless you are trying an extreme stategy or an extremely long-term (and peaceful) game. In fact, the main reason they used to cost so LITTLE, was because when you started with a bunch of them, you might consider SCRAPPING one for the resources (which more than one player has done when they failed to manage their budget properly).

With one available at 2.4 (x3) million, however, it is possible to consider actually building one as a long-term strategy or goal, which is kind of an amusing tease, so I have left that in.

To explain further, Proportions is kind of a counterpoint to the things that don't make sense in the default game mechanics. One main thing that does not make sense is the way that research facilities add directly to one giant empire research pool. That only makes sense for something like a big basic computer problem that is already understood and can be divided amongst computers. Real estate space is not the obstacle to research rate, but the stock game makes it so. So the point of a cultural center is that it should be unique to the homeworld and NOT reproducable... or at least, not without extreme difficulty. Creating a new CC does not represent simply building up a new planetary infrastructure, but also developing new technologies that work well on a completely alien planet (with different gravity, pressure, atmosphere, flora and fauna, weather, temperature, seasons, etc), and perhaps even more importantly, developing a new _civilization_ which is different enough from your original civilization, to see things from a different perspective, so that it can in fact make a huge increase to your empire's abilities, beyond just adding some more factories and labs.

So that's basically why Cultural Centers are nearly unbuildable, on purpose.

Arcologies are massive undertakings themselves, vast pinacles of futuristic community construction, so it makes sense that they take at least 10 years or so to build on a good planet without miraculous technology and/or many millions of people or droids hard at work. On a good planet, they will eventually be worth it, too, especially thanks to the multipliers, but again it is a big investment of time and research. Perhaps unwise to do during war time... unless it will be a 20-year war or a low-intensity one. Rome wasn't built in a day, and neither will an arcology be.

Again, these things are included as the far end of the spectrum of short- to long-term non-military investments. They are not supposed to be done routinely, and they are not supposed to necessarily be a good idea, especially in a crisis. An MP game of Proportions should probably generally represent something of a time of crisis. Starting on a new map without running any turns for history, it represents the initial wave of expansion and colonization by several empires at the same time. The priority is probably to claim as much territory as possible, and perhaps to conquer an alien homeworld or establish an alliance to guarantee that the future will turn out well. Building new civilizations or wonders of architecture may not be the wisest investment during such a time. That's not a reason to not include them as a possible choice, however.

The intermediate cultural facilities offer a spectrum of investment levels to choose between, and I think now with the multipliers, there are now much better (and in fact, good) reasons to consider some which were of more dubious value in 2.5. For particular examples, the Settlements and Communities used to be kind of cheap but not very helpful in 2.5, but in 3.0 their multipliers offer a good reason to use them on production or research colonies that in 2.5 might not have wanted any cultural facility, and they also offer Organic multipliers which the _urban_ cultural facilities do not. The increased scarcity and needs for Organics in 3.0 also make Agrarian facilities much more desirable than in 2.5.

Similarly, some of the higher technology items may also turn out to be very inefficient investments in most cases. Again, this is intentional. Not every new invention makes older designs obsolete, or is the best thing to use. Some inventions may offer unique abilities, but be impractically expensive or large or whatever. But the option remains, and in some cases, items which seem pointless may find situations where they can be put to good use, or provide a solution that would otherwise be impossible. Players should find many more occasions to think about what levels of technology to develop and to deploy, instead of simply in what order to max out which technology, as is often the case in the unmodded game.

I hope that helps explain and makes good clear sense.

(Also, I hope people are planning to continue playing after SEV comes out.)

PvK

Hippocrates

August 14th, 2004, 06:33 PM

PvK

August 14th, 2004, 07:14 PM

Well, in my mind, the multiplier and increased stats of the colonial facilities represent the many offices and labs helped by the well devleoped infrastructure.

It would seem odd that a homeworld would have lots of research labs, but not a single intelligence agency office anywhere, thats why it seems reasonable to have intel bonus as well.

I see. Yes, the homeworld and cities represent not only offices and infrastructure, but the many complex advantages of a livable environment, civilization, etc. Good luck getting your best scientists to be happy about shipping out and working on Outer Pudab VIII, in an office inside a pressure dome where the days are 20 years long, and the nearest civilization is months away by spaceship. Also, their ability to colaborate with their peers throughout the empire (without being intercepted) will be reduced.

The Cultural Centers do include intelligence agencies of some sort, represented by their intrinsic generation. Also it occurs to me that the larger a civilian presence on a colony, the easier it will be for agents to hide and observe things and plot and so on. So I see such facilities as a disadvantage to intel operations, as well as an advantage. That didn't used to seem representable in SE4, but maybe there is a way in 1.91. Hmm. Anyway I will take a look and see.

Not to mention game balance, as those who focus on intel could also benefit from these buildings then, not only those who focus on research.

Yes, though I find it interesting that Intel facilities are currently something that work about like they used to in the old game - if you put a lot of them on colonies, you can get strong intel forces, but especially in the preview 3.0, it makes sense to put them on the lesser-developed planets - covert bases and all that.

...
I think there should be a bigger difference between spaceport Versions and normal ones

I don't see why. Spaceport Versions represent planning and co-location, not more developed urban facilities. The big advantage is they save you two slots on the planet, which can then be used for other things which can be helped by the urban facility's modifiers, etc. It requires longer to build them, though, and so there are planning and efficiency considerations, depending on what you build on the planet and in what order. But since you can have either one Spaceport City facility, or a Spaceport facility and a Resupply facility and a City facility, for essentially the same time and cost, and they represent the same things, only arranged differently, I don't see how it would make sense to give the Spaceport Cities much advantage in performance over a city. I just gave them a +1 or so to add a little detail/interest, to represent the slight effect of convenient colocation, desirability, attention, whatever.

PvK

PvK

August 14th, 2004, 07:30 PM

Hippocrates said:
...
That's partly the point - I liked the slower pace http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
I always felt that the stock game allowed or the generation of too many minerals and reserach points too quickly. I'm just pointing out that I hope the new values don't "speed things up" a manner drasticaly faster than 2.5 (I found the pacing there exquisite).
...

I like the 2.5 pacing too. I think the net effect will be similar. Remember it takes a LONG time to build an arcology. The new values do allow a lot more production and research on both colonies on the homeworld, however there are also several things that slow this down:

* Maximum trade income is halved. This used to often be a major part of an empire's income and research, and still will be, but it's about half as strong now.

* Most research costs are up about 50% or in some cases much more, and extend to higher levels, and/or were split into multiple tech areas.

* Many of the larger facilities and components now cost more, and especially more rads and orgs, and org and rad production on the homeworld is rather less than it was in 2.5, so they will become more valuable earlier on.

* With the halved org and rad construction rates, most of the cultural facilities can take about twice as long to build.

So some things have been multiplied up, while others have been divided down. Net result will be faster in some ways, slower in others, and with I think more range for different approaches.

PvK

csebal

August 14th, 2004, 07:55 PM

Before reading trough the new Posts, here is it..

i was playing with the preview, then i just figured it out:

- research center II
+ tech requirement changed
Applied Research 2 => 1
Computers 0 => 2
- research center III
+ tech requirement changed
Applied Research 3 => 1
Computers 0 => 4

- research complex I
+ tech requirement changed
Applied Research 1 => 2
Computers 0 => 1
- research complex II
+ tech requirement changed
Applied Research 1 => 2
Computers 1 => 3
- research complex III
+ tech requirement changed
Applied Research 1 => 2
Computers 2 => 5

- research megaplex I
+ tech requirement changed
Applied Research 1 => 3
- research megaplex II
+ tech requirement changed
Applied Research 1 => 3
Industry 2 => 3
Computers 2 => 4
- research megaplex III
+ tech requirement changed
Applied Research 1 => 3
Industry 2 => 4
Computers 2 => 6

This is how i think the research requirements for research facilities could be changed.

As you can, see, all the research facilities are now research lvl1, all complexes lvl2, and all megaplexes are lvl3. The industry and computers research levels allow for the improved Versions of each... this would balance out research somewhat, making it look like actual advancement, instead of receiving both complex 3 and megaplex 3 once you've researched research 3.

Well, its kinda late here, so in case im not clear enough, just tell, and i'll try to explain it this morning.

csebal

August 14th, 2004, 08:09 PM

...
I think there should be a bigger difference between spaceport Versions and normal ones

I don't see why. Spaceport Versions represent planning and co-location, not more developed urban facilities. The big advantage is they save you two slots on the planet, which can then be used for other things which can be helped by the urban facility's modifiers, etc. It requires longer to build them, though, and so there are planning and efficiency considerations, depending on what you build on the planet and in what order. But since you can have either one Spaceport City facility, or a Spaceport facility and a Resupply facility and a City facility, for essentially the same time and cost, and they represent the same things, only arranged differently, I don't see how it would make sense to give the Spaceport Cities much advantage in performance over a city. I just gave them a +1 or so to add a little detail/interest, to represent the slight effect of convenient colocation, desirability, attention, whatever.

PvK

Well, just take a look at the basic history and how ports affected economy, wars, trade, science, development, basically everything. A colony with a spaceport has the opportunity to become a major interstellar hub for traffic going trough the region.

Other than that, the offered services as well. In my modified Version (i alway modify everything i get my hands on, thats where all the stupid ideas come from http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif), minor spaceports only give spaceports, while everything above spaceport city (excluding city and major city) gives a resupply depo as well (they also have an increasing repair capacity). This is supposed to simulate the ability to deal with the supply / maintenance of passing ships.

of course, their price is significantly higher than the price of the normal facility.

PvK

August 14th, 2004, 08:39 PM

...
Well, just take a look at the basic history and how ports affected economy, wars, trade, science, development, basically everything. A colony with a spaceport has the opportunity to become a major interstellar hub for traffic going trough the region.
...

Spaceport access is by planet (actually by system), not by facility. Without a spaceport, zero resources, research or intel points reach the empire.

You seem to be imagining Spaceport City as a very different thing than I am.

To me, a City on a colony with a Spaceport in the system has very nearly as good spaceport access as a Spaceport City. It's just a matter of useful/optimal space/infrastructure utilization. The Spaceport City is a City with a Spaceport integrated into it from the planning stage. The effect is on the number of slots used, which is really a major effect, without altering the generation or multipliers of the city at all.

In developing a colony on an alien planet, it seems to me there would be local details, both indigenous and evolutionary as the planet goes through stages of development, where it would be more or less efficient to build population and spaceports and infrastructure. The choice between building a Spaceport City first, or building spaceport and then a city, or other combinations at different times, abstractly represent those.

However you imagine it, though, it is pretty clear that having two extra facility slots on a planet is a major advantage, especially once a multiplier is in place. On the other hand, having a space port available immediately is also a big advantage.

Perhaps what you meant is that having a spaceport on a planet, as opposed to using a spaceport from some other planet, should have an advantage for that planet? In that case, that's something I hadn't really considered, and I do think that is a good point and would be something to work into the economics. It would add an (annoying ? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif) decision about whether or not you should add space ports to every planet or not. I still wouldn't make it something special for Space Port Cities, but for all spaceports - add some planetary modifiers and/or production from all spaceports. Hmm.

PvK

PvK

August 14th, 2004, 08:48 PM

csebal said:
...This is how i think the research requirements for research facilities could be changed.

As you can, see, all the research facilities are now research lvl1, all complexes lvl2, and all megaplexes are lvl3. The industry and computers research levels allow for the improved Versions of each... this would balance out research somewhat, making it look like actual advancement, instead of receiving both complex 3 and megaplex 3 once you've researched research 3.
...

The logic of the current system is that the complexes and megacomplexes are not _better_ Versions of the standard facilities. Instead, they are massive industrial Versions of the standard facilties. That's why the costs are as they are, and why the tech requirement is mainly Industry, rather than Research. Quality versus quantity. Sophistication versus brute force. The levels required are now a bit different (more difficult), but I think I will keep the concept. If I wanted linear increase I would just have Facility I-IX require Research 1-9 or Mining 1-9.

I was thinking though of perhaps removing the ability to upgrade facilities to complexes and megacomplexes. This would allow the numbering to remain I-III for each, would I think increase the value of each choice, and would slow down the ramping up of the homeworld to all megaplexes, and generally counterbalance the other changes I have made which tend to speed things up. You'd have to pay the full megaplex cost instead of building facility I's and then upgrading. And the weird side-effect of delaying Industry research to allow continued upgrades to Complexes before investing in megaplexes would be removed. Seems like a good idea - anyone object?

PvK

csebal

August 15th, 2004, 06:46 AM

My point is, that because spaceport Versions of colonial facilities only cost a little more than tha spaceportless one, it makes no sense to build those.

In my mind, the spaceported Version is a stepping stone towards the next bigger facility, and as such it should have a significantly increased price, and somewhat better stats (well, you are right in that the two extra facilities may be an advantage enough).

Anyway, what im arguing about is, that they should be placed further apart in price, making it actually a hard choice of what to build.

Alneyan

August 15th, 2004, 06:48 AM

PvK said:
I was thinking though of perhaps removing the ability to upgrade facilities to complexes and megacomplexes. This would allow the numbering to remain I-III for each, would I think increase the value of each choice, and would slow down the ramping up of the homeworld to all megaplexes, and generally counterbalance the other changes I have made which tend to speed things up. You'd have to pay the full megaplex cost instead of building facility I's and then upgrading. And the weird side-effect of delaying Industry research to allow continued upgrades to Complexes before investing in megaplexes would be removed. Seems like a good idea - anyone object?

PvK

Well, you do not really need to delay your research even for upgrades. You would have to build a facility belonging to the same family (Research Center I for example), do the research for the upgrade of Research Complex I, launch the upgrade on one planet, save the upgrade in the queue, and go on with your research in Industry. If you only want Research Complexes rather than Megacomplexes, you will then fill the queue with this Research Complex upgrade. At least, I would believe it would work.

I would rather not be able to directly upgrade to Megacomplexes myself. Besides this, I do prefer the current principle behind homeworld facilities and cities over the previous one, but didn't have the time to delve into how they work yet.

PvK

August 15th, 2004, 03:26 PM

Again, very good to know! Thanks!

Fyron

August 15th, 2004, 04:47 PM

You can even use this to add the upgrade order to the new queue before the facilities are even built (assuming you already have a Fill Queue). Additionally, you can use this method to upgrade only X facilities at a time, and leave all others unupgraded. Very handy to get some upgraded before the others when you have say 10 facilities to upgrade, to start getting extra points sooner... No need to upgrade all 12 cities at once. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

csebal

August 15th, 2004, 06:59 PM

spotted another one

religious buildings, while some of them give the same bonuses as value improvement and condition improvement plants, have extremely cheap tech / resource costs.

PvK

August 16th, 2004, 01:28 PM

I'll double-check the religious facilities (and I think I already tweaked them a little recently), but in general yes they may be much cheaper in terms of resources than equivalent mundane facilities. The main requirement for an effective temple, it seems to me, is devotion, rather than high-tech materials. This is represented and balanced via empire start points (paying for the Devoutly Religious trait), rather than by resource costs. Note that the main power of the Religious trait in the unmodded game, the talisman, is much reduced in effect, cheapness, and ease of access, compared to the unmodded game. So I think having temples cheaper in resource cost than mundane facilities is ok in general.

PvK

PvK

August 16th, 2004, 01:43 PM

Imperator Fyron said:
You can even use this to add the upgrade order to the new queue before the facilities are even built (assuming you already have a Fill Queue). Additionally, you can use this method to upgrade only X facilities at a time, and leave all others unupgraded. Very handy to get some upgraded before the others when you have say 10 facilities to upgrade, to start getting extra points sooner... No need to upgrade all 12 cities at once. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Egad - you people are tricky! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Unfortunately, these loopholes somewhat undermine certain aspects of the design aimed at less tricky players. I'm glad there is _a_ way to upgrade one facility at a time, but it is an unfortunately complex way to have to do it.
I guess once you know how to use the Fill Queue feature, and if you manage to set them up at the right time, then you have an easy enough way to do it. Geez.

Ok. I guess I should ask though: Is there a way to fake out the system so you don't even have to build the facility you are upgrading from? I know the AI (used to?) be able to upgrade facilities while they were being built. Can a sneaky player do that too, essentially halving the cost of practically any facility that can be upgraded to?

PvK

csebal

August 16th, 2004, 02:45 PM

Well, i havent seen the final stats, and i certainly agree, that they should be cheaper, but in my Version (preview)

the nature shrine stats look like this:
+ Nature Shrine I
2k/6k/2k resources / 1% value and conditions
+ Value Improvement plant I (100k each) + Climate Control Facility I (8k each)

--- so 108k resources vs 6k resources for the same 1% (in build time, this is say 5 turns vs 80

+ Nature Shrine II
4k/12k/4k resources / 2% value and conditions
+ Value Improvement plant II (200k each) + Climate Control Facility II (10k each)

--- 210k vs 12k resources

Nature Shrine III
10k/30k/10k resources / 3% value and conditions
+ Value Improvement Plant III (400k each) + Climate Control Facility III (12k)

--- wow, 412k vs 30k

I think you got my point, if thats not enough, we can add, that nature shrine is system wide, so you only need one for the entire system, instead of two normal facilities every planet. Well, this also means, you can only have one affecting the system at a time, but considering the build costs of the normal facilities, its unlikely, one will ever build one, not to mention multiple ones.

Should religious facilities be cheaper? definitely, are they cheaper now? Nope - they are practically free.

Would they cost half of the price of the regular one, we could argue about it being fair or not, personally i think, that the system wide ability, and that its basically a 2-in-1 structure justifies an even higher price than the normal facilities have.

Lets not forget, that is rather easy to reach research wise (at least it was Last time i checked), and that the 1500 points the trait costs you is not paid for 'free value improvement on every of your planets', but for 'access to otherwise restricted technology'.

Sorry if my post sounded a bit like ranting, but i had a hard day behind me, and had to release the steam valves somewhere http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif if you feel insulted by my post / tone / whatever, please acceppt my apologies, its not meant to flame or insult anyone.

-- EDIT:
Reading trough the post a second time, it is half as worse as i expected. Lets just say, my built-in cooling system works like nothing else. It also had a terrible grammar and some weird typos, which im too lazy to locate and correct

PvK

August 16th, 2004, 05:07 PM

No problem csebal.

We may have some different premises about balance. When a technology requires a unique trait, OR when a competing technology has a superior/different ability (here, is stackable), OR when a competing technology offers the best end result but at a much higher cost, then I see these as qualitative factors that can obviate the need for quantitative balance.

Additionally, when an ability seems to accomplish a task that might reasonably be imagined as nearly impossible (like increasing the value of a planet, changing its atmosphere type, or creating a ring or sphereworld, or creating a new Cultural Center i.e. civilization that can nearly double the research rate of an entire empire) then I think a designer might assign costs which in fact make the accomplishment impractical or nearly impossible. They can then serve as goals or rarely-broken boundaries.

I.e.:

* 1500 racial points is enough to give Devoutly Relgious players an advantage like cheap temples with effects that aren't matched in the other tech areas, and without being cost-balanced with them.

* The fact that Nature Shrine gives a maximum 3% bonus, while Value Plants stack up to potentially much higher rates, again means that Value Plants might want to be priced much higher, when the stacking technique is considered.

These points just say to me that a designer could feel free to set the costs quite high without creating direct imbalance. Whether they would want to or not, though, is a different question.

In Proportions 2.5, the Nature Shrine was the same, but the Value Improvement Plant cost 10k/10k/10k at all three levels.

So then, Nature Shrine at:
I - 2k/ 6k/ 2k
II - 4k/12k/ 4k
III - 10k/30k/10k

Was much more clearly comparable.

A level-III Nature Shrine will take about 4 years to build even on a fairly developed colony (~750 organic build rate), so I don't think I agree with these being considered FREE.

Players requested that Value Improvement Plant should not be so cheap, and in the 3.0 preview it was raised by TEN TIMES to:

I - 100k/100k/100k
II - 200k/200k/200k
III - 400k/400k/400k

(Of course, if you have the space, and time, you can theoretically still build multiple I's and II's, so the III is space-efficient but cost/time-inefficient.)

Now, 10k/10k/10k was probably too cheap for VIP III, because you could put several on one planet and they stack. The new VIP costs are rather high, but they shouldn't be too cheap or people will build several.

In Props 2.5, a good colony might build a VIP every 6 turns, so a 20-year plan might be:

Year 1-2, colonize a good-value large breathable planet and ferry population to it and build a planetary space yard there.

Year 3-8, build ten VIP III's there. During this, the value would go up about 6 x 3 x 10 / 2 = 90%.

Year 9-15, build other facilities while leaving the ten VIPs there, adding another approximately 7 x 3 x 10 = 210%.

Year 16-20, scrap the VIP's and replace with 10 resource extractors, cashing in on the value of the ~+300% planet.

That's a long-term project, and expensive at first, but it could pay off well, and seems a bit odd.

In 3.0, it might be worse, in that the homeworld now has many available slots. Using them for VIP's will of course cause a major sacrifice in immediate research and resources, but a few VIP's could also pay off pretty well in the long run.

NEVERTHELESS, I think my x10 costs for VIP's are perhaps too high, and yes the Nature Shrine costs could stand to be somewhat higher.

This is the result of my rushing to get 3.0 ready for these PBW games. Of course, if I weren't rushing, I might never get anything released.

At any rate, I think the VIP (or, a high VIP rate) should be restricted mainly by time. A 1% rate I am not so worried about. A 2% rate is a strong effect in the long term, especially on a homeworld or other valuable planet. A 3% should I think be something so good that it should be so difficult that the cost should be something that makes players stop to think. Especially if they are getting it all in one facility. That's why I doubled the cost of a VIP III vs. a VIP II. I'm going to say it should take approximately 10 years for a good colony to build a VIP I, and thus 20 years for two VIP I's, and I think a VIP II can simply be twice the cost of a VIP I (the advantage of a II being the space used; the advantage of two I's being you get the first 1% effect sooner, and don't have to research level II). A good colony I define as about 750 org build rate, which is about what you get with 20m people. So 100 turns x 750 orgs/turn = 75000 orgs. So I overcharged maybe 33% - I hit the right order of magnitude. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

What about homeworlds? A good one might have twice as high an org build rate. So a VIP I per 5 years, a VIP II in 10 years, or a VIP III in 20 years, with 75% of the preview costs. Again, that seems like a reasonable rate for what you get (a very major cost, but a very major payoff... eventually). Ideally, I'd like to offer smaller effects, for smaller costs, but 1% is the minimum possible value.

Finally, back to Nature Shrines. The time and costs at colony worlds seem ok to me at first. But when the system-wide 3% effect is considered, and especially it's use on the homeworld, it deserves more thought. A Proportions game can easily go 100-300 turns. At 100 turns after construction, a religious home system will be up about 30%. At 200 turns after construction, 60% and at 300 turns, 90% (anyone know if it just adds 3% each year, or if it is a compound interest and how fractions are considered?). Construction time though would currently be 40 turns (plus maybe 10-15 to set up and stock a colony) on a home system colony, or 20 turns on the homeworld itself (which isn't the best choice, since then it uses a HW slot when the same effect can be had on a colony). So add 50 turns to the values shown above. From a balance standpoint, it's a strong effect but not, I think, an unreasonable one. The research investment and time to reach Religious Tech III (557,500 research points). I would add an average of say 50 turns to get that far (assuming no research rush or undue concentration).

30% increase by turn 200, 60% by turn 300, 90% by turn 400.

So it really depends on how long the game Lasts. You get a good payoff by turn 200, and then it continues getting better and better. Like in the unmodded game, this may start looking scary to non-religious players, and might make you a target. Also, your bountiful systems may look more and more tempting to capture.

So from a balance perspective I think it is ok, but could stand to be reduced. From a "realism" and "proportions" standpoint, though, that's nearly doubling the resource output of the home system in a mere 40 years. One might point out that it's religion and science fiction and therefore can do what it wants. On the other hand, that does seem pretty fast from my realism/proportions standpoint. The problem, again, is that the game doesn't let me slow it down much. Best I can do is cut the rate down to 2% or 1%, and then that leaves less room for improvement at higher investment levels.

One approach would be to drop the Nature Shrine effects to 2% or 1%, and then give them decreasing costs. This is a big nerf to the effect, so one needs to look at what they have left. Talisman is a unique combat plus, but is pretty expensive. The War Shrine III gives the equivalent of a 1225-empire-point bonus if your religious race has an aggressiveness bonus... but only in systems where you have that shrine.

All in all, I think I should probably make those changes (75% the 3.0 cost of VIP's, and Nature Shrine nerf), but the religious trait ends up seeming somewhat weak... or... only worth about what it costs, especially before the higher levels are researched. Maybe I will do that, but plan to give the Religious something new later on.

Any religious players peeved about this idea? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif

PvK

Alneyan

August 16th, 2004, 05:19 PM

The Nature Shrine should add up every year, until the limit is reached (250% for planets, unless the shrine allows them to get all the way to 300%). That is, if you are playing with unlimited resources. On the other hand, the Condition increase is a multiplier, so 3% is very weak for planets with poor conditions. The values for the conditions range from 0.1 (Deadly) to 1.5 (Optimal), and so low values take a lot of time before you can recover from them.

You may also want to decrease the costs of the VI II and III facilities to avoid the "sneaky" way of building the first level facility and upgrading for a lower cost, as some players may go with this kind of trick (or loophole, as you will).

I am certainly not against weakening the Nature Shrine, or stretching its levels beyond level III (I will take Religious in the PBW game, so it isn't a fit of Religious-phobia). I must also admit I am intrigued by what you plan to add to the Religious trait. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

csebal

August 17th, 2004, 07:08 AM

Well, my point was, that you esentially nerfed the sh*t out of planet improvement facilities, by increasing their cost dramatically, it would be 'unfair' to leave easy to access, and extremely cheap system wide planet improving tech in the game for those who go with a certain racial tech area.

With the increased price, building multiple improvement buildings is most probably out of question, you'll be happy, if you manage to build just one, so the fact, that the nature shrines do not stack is not that big of a disadvantage.

Im not saying they should cost the same as regular tech facilities, but compared to the price of a simple value improvement plant I, even the nature shrine III can be considered 'free'.

FFS, the value impro plant III is more expensive than the arcology (with arcology being 350k iirc) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif and even the arcologies have a build time, thats beyond reasonable (see my previous post about the 100-150 turn barrier).

Then again, im not the average proportions user, in my own games, i always mod your mod to some extent, for example by increasing the pop growth rate somewhat, modifying various building stats (recently, i've completely readjusted the colonial facilities of 3.0 to fit my taste, changed the way research facilities are spread on the tech tree, etc...)

Maybe i should stop posting stuff like that. Simply because my opinion is rather alone on the thread - havent seen too many Posts arguing with what i said - , and i feel it may be influencing you in a way, other Users of the mod may not like.

Lets just say, i'll stick to bug reporting, and will try not to come up with suggestions on how to make the mod better for my taste http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

A question: if you destroy a planet, will it end up as an asteroid field, or will it completely disappear?

csebal

Alneyan

August 17th, 2004, 08:56 AM

A destroyed planet gives an asteroid belt (of the same size as the planet), that could then be converted back into a planet. Only a Black Hole Creator can fully destroy planets (or anything else for this matter, wormholes notwithstanding).

csebal

August 17th, 2004, 10:54 AM

Well, not all is lost then i guess.. one can always recover from the loss of his planets... Then again, it'll surely take a lot of time to build that cultural center again http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Fyron

August 17th, 2004, 12:21 PM

anyone know if it just adds 3% each year, or if it is a compound interest and how fractions are considered?

In a normal resources game, the 3% is always added linearly to the planet value. 3% goes to 6%. 100% goes to 103%. 167% goes to 170%.

PvK

August 17th, 2004, 02:30 PM

Thanks Fyron and Alneyan for that answer.

PvK

August 17th, 2004, 02:48 PM

csebal said:
Well, my point was, that you esentially nerfed the sh*t out of planet improvement facilities, by increasing their cost dramatically, it would be 'unfair' to leave easy to access, and extremely cheap system wide planet improving tech in the game for those who go with a certain racial tech area.

By the same kind of reasoning, any unique racial ability is 'unfair', and they all have unique abilities. The real question is whether it is unbalanced. If I turn the Nature Shrine down to 1-2% instead of max 3%, I don't think it's unbalanced at all. Even at 3%, it only looks unbalanced to me if you are in a game with peace for the first 250 turns or so, and against players who won't gang up on you to take your extra-valuable planets. In other words, even as it was, it wasn't unbalanced, it was just a pretty strong very long-term strategy that required Religious racial tech. Temporal players can also try a long-term superiority strategy with, say, temporal space yards. Psychics could try a long-term intel dominance strategy with their unique psychic intel abilities. Organics can try a long-term superiority strat with their replicant centers. Crystallines can try one by making a ringworld out of one star in a trinary system and filling it with crystalline solar generators. Anyone can try an early game blitz strategy against any of those, and will have a 1500-racial point advantage, and be able to concentrate on weapons of conquest rather than long-range investments.

With the increased price, building multiple improvement buildings is most probably out of question, you'll be happy, if you manage to build just one, so the fact, that the nature shrines do not stack is not that big of a disadvantage.

Yes, this is a good point. I needed to review the numbers. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!

Im not saying they should cost the same as regular tech facilities, but compared to the price of a simple value improvement plant I, even the nature shrine III can be considered 'free'.

If a 4-year investment by a strong colony can be considered 'free' from a certain perspective, then I suppose so. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif

FFS, the value impro plant III is more expensive than the arcology (with arcology being 350k iirc) http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Good observation. Question is, of course, how long should it take to build a Value Improvement Plant? What is a Value Improvement Plant, really, anyway? How desirable is it for players to be able to simply ADD value to any planet in a linear fashion (since it lets them essentially change the map)? Etc.

and even the arcologies have a build time, thats beyond reasonable (see my previous post about the 100-150 turn barrier).

Then again, im not the average proportions user, in my own games, i always mod your mod to some extent, for example by increasing the pop growth rate somewhat, modifying various building stats (recently, i've completely readjusted the colonial facilities of 3.0 to fit my taste, changed the way research facilities are spread on the tech tree, etc...)

Maybe i should stop posting stuff like that. Simply because my opinion is rather alone on the thread - havent seen too many Posts arguing with what i said - , and i feel it may be influencing you in a way, other Users of the mod may not like.

Lets just say, i'll stick to bug reporting, and will try not to come up with suggestions on how to make the mod better for my taste http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
...

Ya it sounds like you prefer a slightly faster pace than the design parameters of Proportions, which I can certainly understand. Good to know.

Your comments and observations have been quite helpful. Thanks, and please let me know if you have any further feedback!

PvK

csebal

August 18th, 2004, 04:33 AM

If a 4-year investment by a strong colony can be considered 'free' from a certain perspective, then I suppose so. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif

Compared to the regular facility, which takes 40+ years to build for a lesser effect? Well, compared to that, a system wide facility that 'only' takes 4 years to build is virtually free. Thats how i meant it.

Good observation. Question is, of course, how long should it take to build a Value Improvement Plant? What is a Value Improvement Plant, really, anyway? How desirable is it for players to be able to simply ADD value to any planet in a linear fashion (since it lets them essentially change the map)? Etc.

As the planet value adds to the effect of EVERY resource generator on that planet, i think the value improvement facilities are quite valuable.

and even the arcologies have a build time, thats beyond reasonable (see my previous post about the 100-150 turn barrier).

Then again, im not the average proportions user, in my own games, i always mod your mod to some extent, for example by increasing the pop growth rate somewhat, modifying various building stats (recently, i've completely readjusted the colonial facilities of 3.0 to fit my taste, changed the way research facilities are spread on the tech tree, etc...)

Maybe i should stop posting stuff like that. Simply because my opinion is rather alone on the thread - havent seen too many Posts arguing with what i said - , and i feel it may be influencing you in a way, other Users of the mod may not like.

Lets just say, i'll stick to bug reporting, and will try not to come up with suggestions on how to make the mod better for my taste http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif
...

Ya it sounds like you prefer a slightly faster pace than the design parameters of Proportions, which I can certainly understand. Good to know.

Well, in singleplayer, i'm quite happy with the original pace, as i have all time of the world to play, and can run turns as fast i prefer.

In multiplayer games however, i found the proportions pace to be somewhat sluggish.. with turns only coming once a day - a year can pass by the time you build an arcology with the current constr. yard / facility stats. Even if it 'only' takes 100 turns to build, thats an average of 3 months, considering a one turn / day game speed.

This can - but again, this is rather subjective - make one feel like a snail, trying to reach the top of Everest.

Your comments and observations have been quite helpful. Thanks, and please let me know if you have any further feedback!

PvK

I'll certainly do. I may not agree with every change made, but all-in-one, i like your mod. Talking about it: any news about the final Version? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

PvK

August 18th, 2004, 11:21 PM

csebal said:

If a 4-year investment by a strong colony can be considered 'free' from a certain perspective, then I suppose so. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif

Compared to the regular facility, which takes 40+ years to build for a lesser effect? Well, compared to that, a system wide facility that 'only' takes 4 years to build is virtually free. Thats how i meant it.

I understand, and sympathize a little. I was just stating the counterpoint.

Good observation. Question is, of course, how long should it take to build a Value Improvement Plant? What is a Value Improvement Plant, really, anyway? How desirable is it for players to be able to simply ADD value to any planet in a linear fashion (since it lets them essentially change the map)? Etc.

As the planet value adds to the effect of EVERY resource generator on that planet, i think the value improvement facilities are quite valuable.

Sure they're very valueable from the point of view of a player wanting to have one for themself. From the point of the mod designer, or of a player thinking about the type of game he wants to play, though, I think it can be desirable to limit the most powerful effects, particularly ones which don't make a lot of sense and/or which remove interesting limits which would otherwise need to be worked around. That's one of the main design themes of Proportions mod: find the things which are seem more powerful than they should be and that remove interesting choices from the game by offering ways around otherwise-interesting problems. If you can cheaply change the atmosphere of planets, or raise the value of all planets to maximum, then once that is done, the map is much less interesting because planets which were once uniquely valuable are now just average.

Ya it sounds like you prefer a slightly faster pace than the design parameters of Proportions, which I can certainly understand. Good to know.

Well, in singleplayer, i'm quite happy with the original pace, as i have all time of the world to play, and can run turns as fast i prefer.

In multiplayer games however, i found the proportions pace to be somewhat sluggish.. with turns only coming once a day - a year can pass by the time you build an arcology with the current constr. yard / facility stats. Even if it 'only' takes 100 turns to build, thats an average of 3 months, considering a one turn / day game speed.

This can - but again, this is rather subjective - make one feel like a snail, trying to reach the top of Everest.

In Proportions multi-player, the goal should be something more like dominating the valley below Everest, because it will be 200 years before you have the technology to survive on top of Everest. There are still plenty of things to do that can be done on a shorter time scale. Maybe I should specify some victory conditions for these games, so people aren't stuck thinking they are supposed to turn the entire quadrant into utopias before getting down to business?

Your comments and observations have been quite helpful. Thanks, and please let me know if you have any further feedback!

PvK

I'll certainly do. I may not agree with every change made, but all-in-one, i like your mod. Talking about it: any news about the final Version? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

I'm sorry about the delay. I was supposed to get to finish it on Monday, but have had a steady stream of unexpected people wanting me to do unexpected major tasks immediately. I am now thinking Friday.

PvK

Captain Kwok

August 18th, 2004, 11:29 PM

Is it me, or is the "code" font extremely small even using the larger shrapnel font? I can hardly read the items!

***

Edit: I just realized I was responding to a post for changes in Version 3.0 - not noticing that was about 100 Posts ago. Geez.

PvK

August 19th, 2004, 04:05 AM

Heh. Actually, the browser (or OS?) Version and/or settings seem to have very different ideas about font sizes on this Version of the forum software.

On my IE6/Win98SE box, all the text is rather small.

On my IE6/WinXP box at work (where I think I have the font size turned up somewhere), it actually looks about like it used to. Then again, maybe it looks like it used to look at home, while it used to look big at work.

PvK

csebal

August 19th, 2004, 04:53 AM

We'll see how the new game runs. I'm sure it'll be full of action, but i'll miss having really developed worlds, as building something for two - real life - years will probably not be an option when you have possible enemies - aka allies - around you.

To repeat myself: we'll see what happens.

PvK

August 21st, 2004, 10:51 PM

Ok, believe it or not, I am going to post 3.0 today!

I have been adding a bunch of adjustments which I hope you'll agree are neat. I'm still testing and making Last-minute tweaks, but it will be available a bit later today.

Oh boy, new forum icons today... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif

Hmm, eyes but no nose: /threads/images/Graemlins/icon10.gif /threads/images/Graemlins/icon10.gif

PvK

PvK

August 22nd, 2004, 12:36 AM

Mmm, well, got stuck messing with Stellar Manipulation. I may have to finish it tomorrow morning.

csebal

August 22nd, 2004, 08:01 AM

Sounds good.

It may not be an issue, but i spotted something weird in the 3.0 preview. Looking at the tech tree (if you turn the all tech visible option on), the game throws an error.

It may not be a problem in the stock 3.0, but i think it costs nothing to check.

Too bad my friend, who also plays in our game just went to holiday this saturday http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif Would the others kill me, if i would ask you to delay the game until next sunday? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Just joking. I'll try to get his passwords, so we don't have to wait trough the 48 hours for each turn.

AMF

August 22nd, 2004, 09:49 PM

Actaully, one of the players in the #2 game is out of pocket until the 26th due to a family emergency, so maybe a few more days won't be a bad idea..?

Ragnarok-X

August 23rd, 2004, 11:40 AM

So how is it going PvK http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

PvK

August 23rd, 2004, 12:52 PM

Oh my stars! Well, ahem, between my perfectionism, my addiction to adding "one more thing", my S.O.'s insistance on my assembly of hundreds and hundreds of pounds of "build it yourself" furniture (...), I kept delaying packing this up. Mainly I wanted to get everything that won't patch well put in before these games start. I seem to have some delusions about how much time it takes to do these things, as well as the aforementioned addiction to adding stuff. I don't know why I decided it would be so important to redesign the entire Stellar Manipulation tech area and split it into a dozen or more new technologies - I only know that I still think it's a cool idea - but my rational side is mad at myself for not deciding to skip it since that stuff doesn't generally get used until turn 200+ anyway. At least there are a lot of changes and better-tweaked values on many things. Coming soon... real real soon, darn it! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif No, seriously, I am trying to post it this morning.
/threads/images/Graemlins/icon48.gif <- minor explosion in research lab

PvK

PvK

August 23rd, 2004, 04:02 PM

Ok, so later tonight... /threads/images/Graemlins/crazy.gif

At least, I am going to be really pretty pleased with the stuff I added, I think. I added some useful stuff, too, which should lend some freshness to it - mainly the weapons I adapted from Foundations mod. APB and Meson BLasters are now very high-tech weapons which do a lot of damage to unshielded targets, while laser and charged particle weapons take their place and vie with the adjusted DUC for early-tech weapons.

PvK

csebal

August 24th, 2004, 05:26 AM

Well, thats two people out of game #2 already... then i would say it cant hurt to wait a few more days.

Sure, there are still 6 of us there, but personally i dont mind the wait, as i rather play with all the players there, instead of waiting 48 hours for every turn.

Thats not good for us, and not good for them either, because they'll miss the first few turns that way, and thats quite annoying.

csebal

August 24th, 2004, 05:27 AM

Additionally, PvK can use that few days to wrap things up nicely.

I would love to have some orbital research / intel labs for example :P

-- csebal takes cover before people start shooting.

AMF

August 24th, 2004, 09:41 AM

Ditto.

csebal said:
I would love to have some orbital research / intel labs for example

PvK

August 24th, 2004, 09:56 AM

Heh, ok.
I'm going to be on trip till Friday.
See 3.0 thread in this forum - new Version available.
I will do a 3.1 shortly thereafter which we can upgrade to.

Game#3 will have six players exactly, because I made a map for exactly 6, somewhat balanced.

PvK

AMF

August 24th, 2004, 10:29 AM

Will we need to redo our empires for the new proportions games with this release or (as you indicated earlier) are they good as is (if made with the beta of this Version)?

Thanks,

Alarik

PvK said:
Heh, ok.
I'm going to be on trip till Friday.
See 3.0 thread in this forum - new Version available.
I will do a 3.1 shortly thereafter which we can upgrade to.

Game#3 will have six players exactly, because I made a map for exactly 6, somewhat balanced.

PvK

PvK

August 27th, 2004, 04:16 PM

They're good for 3.0.

Shoe however pointed out a bug I'll need to fix somehow... but I think/hope I can figure out a way that this will actually work without having to re-do any EMP files.

PvK

PvK

August 28th, 2004, 08:13 PM

I got the bug fixed and the 3.0.1 patch released to the Proportions web page (http://g2.latibulum.com/pvk/proportions/).

Only players who have chosen the same shipset as someone else will need to change their EMP files.

PvK

PvK

August 28th, 2004, 09:05 PM

Both games are pretty much ready to start. I'm just waiting on PBW to make 3.0.1 available as a game Version.

PvK

Ed Kolis

August 28th, 2004, 09:41 PM

It is possible to run the turns offline until PBW has the mod set up, you know... not like I'd force you to do that or anything, I just thought maybe you forgot http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Hippocrates

August 28th, 2004, 10:00 PM

Hey PvK,

I still think you should join in on at least one of the games (if you want to, that is). What better way for you to see how 3.0 does, and know what needs fixing / works just right? On a map as mall as has been discussed, I don't think you'd have a big advantage, and hosting games you don't play in could be a drag, no?

-Hippo

PvK

August 29th, 2004, 02:46 AM

Ok, good suggestions, both.

Apart from being so busy, I sort of thought that someone is probably going to drop out of both games at some point, and from experience in the #1 game, sometimes no one takes up the empty spot, so taking over someone else's spot seemed like a bright idea, and would provide some extra challenge.

Hmm.

I won't join the #3 game since it's a six-player map (well, I could be silly and make a race that starts in the cut-off limbo zone, which would only appear if someone eventually opened a warp point there).

I guess I will start the #3 game on manual hosting. It hadn't occurred to me before.

PvK

csebal

August 29th, 2004, 06:36 AM

A possible change.. i was thinking about it for quite some time, and i think it could fit in:

the starliner ships have no maintenance reduction. This leads to the somewhat odd situation, where using medium transports as starliners is more viable economically.

i think starliners could use at least the same ammount of maint. reduction as transport ships get, or even a bit more. After all, their 'only' advantage over transports is that they are there right from the start (the small starliner i mean). Other than that, they are smaller and slower than medium transports.

What do you think?

PvK

August 29th, 2004, 02:20 PM

Yes, improving the starliners is actually on my "to do" list. The reason they are the way they are is that the first starliners are the low-tech solution to moving population before Medium Transports are available. Similarly, Large Starliner is designed as an early but not cheap solution to moving more than 1M at a time. I agree it would good to have some better starliners. I have been meaning to keep the existing ones while adding some higher-tech ones which provide lower maintenance and/or higher speed, so there will be good reasons to use them for population transport instead of ordinary transports.

PvK

TheDeadlyShoe

August 30th, 2004, 08:39 AM

I think higher speed would work fine. Would differentiate the two hulls, and it would make sense for a population transport to be faster.

Ed Kolis

August 30th, 2004, 12:36 PM

Of course, then what's to stop the player from using starliners in place of transports, since the starliner modules provide IMMENSE cargo space? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/eek.gif

TheDeadlyShoe

August 30th, 2004, 03:18 PM

The maint bonus on regular transports! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

PvK

August 30th, 2004, 05:22 PM

Yes, the cheapness, and the role of moving less than 1000 kT of stuff around.

AMF

August 31st, 2004, 10:06 AM

Might we put the Prop#2 game on ALPU rather than "no automatic turns"? It looks like all our turns are in, and given that the first 10-30 turns are rather straightforward, the sooner the better...whee!

Just a suggestion.

Thanks again,

Alarik

PvK

August 31st, 2004, 03:36 PM

Yes, of course. I haven't sent my turn in yet, but hang on a sec...

PvK

PvK

August 31st, 2004, 03:40 PM

Both new games are on ALPU now, though all those "ready" players before were just the empire files ready - now we need to send in our first turns.

PvK

csebal

September 1st, 2004, 05:12 AM

That brings up another point.

The smaller starliner modules, along with the larger transport ships are simply not worth it.

Why?

Because you need larger ships to fit multiple modules, which means:

more engines, more support modules -> more upkeep

More importantly, you may also need some improved starliner modules, which are quite expensive (well, at least they were in 2.5.x) compared to the first (clumsiest) Version.

So if you compare a large transport, that can carry multiple units of pop to a medium transport, that only carries one unit, you'll realize, that two medium pop. transport ships are cheaper to maintain than one 'technologycally advanced' large ship.

-- About the small starliner:
IT really should be worse than the medium transport, after all it is easily available from the start. Then again, i never build it, as by the time i get to build pop transport ships, i always have the medium transport ship class, so all in one, the starliners definitely need some fixing.

The goal is to make them viable, but underpowered compared to the medium transports.
Here is a suggestion:
- give those ships a rather high base price, so it'll take many turns to build even a single one. Say: about 5-10 turns on a homeworld.
- give them a damn high maint. reduction, say 90%, to offset their rather high price, and make them economically viable to use on the long run, compared to regular transport ships.
- Limit their speed (this is already done) compared to the regular transport ships.
- Give them some -999% defense and attack bonuses.

With this, you'll get a slow to build, extremely cheap to maintain transport ship, that is a lot slower than the regular tranports, but costs less to maintain on the long run.

PvK

September 2nd, 2004, 01:47 PM

The smaller starliner modules aren't worth it, because they themselves cost so much. They use more advanced technology (perhaps cryogenics) to maximize the population storage per kiloton. It turns out to be inefficient in most cases, which _is_ a balance issue, yes.

The larger ships can I think be a little more efficient than medium transports, if you don't use those high-tech colony modules, and especially if you do use the gravitic drives.

However, I agree there are balance issues. The Medium Transport still ends up being the best utility ship for most, if not all, purposes.

I have design issues though besides balance, which want some thought before implementing balance-only fixes, especially:

* The darn single-cargo-type dilemma. I won't be happy if starliner modules become the best choice for anyone wanting a fairly large amount of cargo. If they get much more cost-effective at higher tech, then people will start putting starliner modules on carriers, which would be silly.

This comes down to which cargo component has the best rate, and which offers the highest capacity.

Then, as you suggest, there could also be something done with the hull types. Similar to the module problem, I wouldn't want to see people using starliners for mining and space yard ships (etc), because they had such high maintenance reduction.

Perhaps what would do better would be making small transports clearly most efficient, but always incapable of reaching 1000 kT capacity (and incapable of holding shipyards). Then perhaps the higher-tech starliner modules should be more no (or not much) less efficient than the first SL module, but store 2MT, 3MT... per module.

The goal would be for small transports to be the best choice for moving units, medium transports to be the best choice for mounting shipyards and such, and starliners with SL modules to be the best choice for moving population...

hopefully, there are numbers to be found which can satisfy those goals. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/egg.gif

I'll be back in a couple of days.

Meanwhile, does anyone know the fellow in game #3 who hasn't sent in his first turn yet, or if he is coming back? Looks like he might need to be replaced so the game can start...

PvK