Removing Techs

Creation, discussion, and balancing of game content such as techs, buildings, ship parts.

Moderators: Oberlus, Committer

Message
Author
User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Removing Techs

#1 Post by Geoff the Medio »

In the interest of simplifying the tech tree a bit, I've made this patch that removes Infrastructure Ecology, which provided a seemingly out-of-place ship speed boost, and Metroplex Infrastructure, which gave a boost to construction/infrastructure.

I'm also wondering about replacing the Greater and Supreme Industrial Center techs with new buildings that provide the same effects, so that production-focused empires can boost their producing by spending production, instead of requiring research output to unlock the effect.

Objections or other thoughts?
Attachments

[The extension patch has been deactivated and can no longer be displayed.]


User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: Removing Techs

#2 Post by Dilvish »

Geoff the Medio wrote:In the interest of simplifying the tech tree a bit, I've made this patch that removes Infrastructure Ecology, which provided a seemingly out-of-place ship speed boost, and Metroplex Infrastructure, which gave a boost to construction/infrastructure.
Awww, I liked that speed boost! :D What seemed out of place about it to you? It seems to me it was in line with things that improved supply, and the types of things that could be imagined to improve supply seems they could easily also improve navigation, logistics, refueling and other misc things can could let one traverse the lanes more rapidly.
I'm also wondering about replacing the Greater and Supreme Industrial Center techs with new buildings that provide the same effects, so that production-focused empires can boost their producing by spending production, instead of requiring research output to unlock the effect.
Sure, sounds like a good idea. With medium or high natives I don't know if any empires are really going to stay production-focused for long, but at the very least it's a good option for games set up with no or low natives.
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Removing Techs

#3 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Dilvish wrote:Awww, I liked that speed boost! :D What seemed out of place about it to you?
The other benefits in that line of techs are related to supply line extensions, rather than speed boosts. Speed seemed like something that would be better in ships, although admittedly the lighthouse has a (somewhat controversial) speed boost. If it's beloved, the speed boost could be added back to the Interstellar Logistics tech.

User avatar
MatGB
Creative Contributor
Posts: 3310
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Removing Techs

#4 Post by MatGB »

I also really like the speed boost, and much prefer it being a tech that applies to everything instead of a single building that requires micromanaging and placing everywhere.

Removing metroplex under current environment does make some sense, but I still think we can and should be doing so much more with infrastructure so I'm not sure about it overall. OTOH, having other construction techs also just add Inf if we do (ie I can persuade you guys) would work.
Mat Bowles

Any code or patches in anything posted here is released under the CC and GPL licences in use for the FO project.

yandonman
Creative Contributor
Posts: 699
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 12:32 am

Re: Removing Techs

#5 Post by yandonman »

I also liked the global speed buff. With larger and larger empires, there's an increasing need for increases in speed. Otherwise, tempo of the game will slow down.
Code released under GPL 2.0. Content released under GPL 2.0 and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0.

User avatar
Sloth
Content Scripter
Posts: 685
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 12:28 am

Re: Removing Techs

#6 Post by Sloth »

I was the one who added the speed bonus to Infrastructure Ecology.

The construction techs were meant to be attractive for widespread connected empires, the speed bonus should help defend them.

When removing techs, be sure to take the rows in the tech tree into account. I tried hard to avoid all dependencies that skip rows, because they're what really make the tree look tangled.
All released under the GNU GPL 2.0 and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 licences.

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Removing Techs

#7 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Sloth wrote:I was the one who added...
Has there also been an effort to avoid crosslinks between categories? Looking over the tree, I wanted to make the singularity engine core (in ships) depend on singularity generation (in production), and deuterium tank (in ships) depend on fusion generation (in production).

User avatar
Sloth
Content Scripter
Posts: 685
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 12:28 am

Re: Removing Techs

#8 Post by Sloth »

Geoff the Medio wrote:Has there also been an effort to avoid crosslinks between categories? Looking over the tree, I wanted to make the singularity engine core (in ships) depend on singularity generation (in production), and deuterium tank (in ships) depend on fusion generation (in production).
I think crosslinks between categories are fine, especially in the direction of ships.
All released under the GNU GPL 2.0 and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 licences.

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: Removing Techs

#9 Post by Dilvish »

I think not having any crosslinks between categories would be kind of boring, but that the tree aesthetics would simply call for them being kept to a low/moderate level. The connections you propose Geoff sound quite proper, and worth the extra bit of clutter.
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Removing Techs

#10 Post by Geoff the Medio »

I've made a few tech tree tweaks. Please complain about what that broke.

In addition to reducing the number of hulls, merging multiple unlocks into single techs would help prune the tree, such as the heavy and camo asteroid hull techs merging into advanced as in this change.

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: Removing Techs

#11 Post by Dilvish »

Geoff the Medio wrote:I've made a few tech tree tweaks. Complain away...
Well, not so much a complaint as a request -- as a general matter it would be nice to have at least a little time prior to commitment for discussing tech tree changes that result in more than a minor increase in cost of techs the AI uses, either directly or indirectly via adding prereqs. It's nicer to have a little time to think about how the AI should get adjusted, and to know that the change is really going to stick as opposed to getting further adjustments after others have had a chance to comment.

Adding Fleet Repair as a prereq to Basic Damage control might make plenty of sense, but without changes to the AI research plans it automatically pulls both that and the additional prereq Interstellar Logistics forward to the spot where the AI researches Basic Damage Repair, basically quadrupling the research cost there (while giving something like twice the benefit, it looks like). So that might no longer be the best spot for the AI to take on that chunk of research. The disruption to research in this case is not terribly significant, and probably won't be particularly noticeable to our playtesters before I get to making any AI adjustments, I hope, but...
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Removing Techs

#12 Post by Geoff the Medio »

So basically, post about every tech tree change before committing?

Or are there exceptions where it's ok to tweak without posting, besides minor cost changes? What about merging sibling techs (which have the same parent(s))?

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: Removing Techs

#13 Post by Dilvish »

Geoff the Medio wrote:So basically, post about every tech tree change before committing? Or are there exceptions where it's ok to tweak without posting, besides minor cost changes? What about merging sibling techs (which have the same parent(s))?
Dilvish wrote:... tech tree changes that result in more than a minor increase in cost of techs the AI uses, either directly or indirectly via adding prereqs....
I don't understand how this isn't clear enough (besides possibly the use of 'minor', which you don't seem to object to). If you find my request inconsiderate, offensive, or selfish in some way, then just don't do it. Things will get worked out eventually.
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 13587
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Removing Techs

#14 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Dilvish wrote:I don't understand how this isn't clear enough...
I'm unclear about whether "more than" meant "anything other than", or if there are other equal or lesser changes that aren't likely to cause problems, a possibly example of which I suggested: merging sibling techs. The specific example / explanation for the problem was how adding prereqs could make the effective cost of a tech a lot higher (and I presume lowering actual or effective costs would also be an issue). But merging siblings wouldn't do that, as long as their costs were similar, since they have the same prereqs. However, the motivation for researching the techs at a particular time might change as well when merging, but I'm not sure if that's something that would concern you...

User avatar
Dilvish
AI Lead and Programmer Emeritus
Posts: 4768
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:25 pm

Re: Removing Techs

#15 Post by Dilvish »

Geoff the Medio wrote:I'm unclear about whether "more than" meant "anything other than", or
Ok, I guess I should have added dashes or quotes or something; I meant more-than-minor changes, not "more than" "minor changes". I was trying to moderate the request so it would be less of a headache; mission failure on that front.

Lowering costs seemed less of a pressing concern to me -- although it could let the human player get a relative advantage, if the AI performance wasn't obviously hurt on an absolute scale I think the players would have more patience and understanding than if the AI play got noticeably messed up. Similar thinking for merging siblings -- if the benefits are merged into whichever sibling at least some of the AIs are researching first, then it doesn't mess up their research. Some AIs could research siblings in different order, but I don't think there is significant variation like that for sibling techs. Delaying Basic Damage Control had seemed like a potentially noticeable thing to me, and I had other things I wanted to work on, but maybe it just doesn't matter.
If I provided any code, scripts or other content here, it's released under GPL 2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0

Post Reply