Setting priorities for bonuses

[MatGB]

OK, something we deliberately put off for after 0.4.5 Release was trying to balance all the effectsgroups for planetary bonuses and the species traits so that Good Population wasn't absultely the best trait any species can have and that others, especially Good/Ultimate Industry actually have an affect into the mid/endgame.

At a first pass for the Population bonuses, there are broadly three groups of bonuses. Growth Specials (and Self Sustaining/Phototrophic effects), 'construction' bonuses (orbital habitation, N-dim structures, etc) and 'biological' bonuses (eg Sybiotic Biology, Xenological Hybridisation, etc).

As a first pass, I plan to have the Growth specials not get the Good/Bad trait applied, then need to choose which of the construction and biological bonuses should get them applied.

Does it make more sense for Egassem get less benefit and Gysache more from better habitation construction or from better lifespans/disease control, etc?

I have no preference, and it'll be subject to change based on balance more than 'realism', obviously, but if realism and game balance work together that's a better choice.

For Industry, there are different factors, I'm going to have flat rate bonuses (adaptive automation, microgravity, gas giant generators) stay flat rate, then group some of the variable bonuses before the trait bonus and some after and see what works, there isn't as clear a distinction there anyway and I simply want to give the traits more meaning than they currently have without overpowering them.

For research, I'm ignoring them at the moment as I think the entire research bonuses schema needs reworking at some point and doing two at once is enough for my brain thanks

So, opinions, which population bonuses should or should not be affected, which industry bonuses should or should not be affected by species traits?

[Sloth]

As a first pass, I plan to have the Growth specials not get the Good/Bad trait applied, then need to choose which of the construction and biological bonuses should get them applied.

Does it make more sense for Egassem get less benefit and Gysache more from better habitation construction or from better lifespans/disease control, etc?

I have no preference, and it'll be subject to change based on balance more than 'realism', obviously, but if realism and game balance work together that's a better choice.

Sounds good.

I don't have a strong preference either, but feel like the Gaia and N-dim structures boni shouldn't be multiplied since they are huge already.

[MatGB]

I don't have a strong preference either, but feel like the Gaia and N-dim structures boni shouldn't be multiplied since they are huge already.

Good point, that's the same logic I was already applying to make sure the Black Hole Gen wasn't getting the bonus, so it makes sense, the traits apply to the 'biological' stuff but not the 'construction' stuff so Egassem get SubHab at full strength.

Um, we might need to go in after this and reduce some of the other bonuses we've given to those guys y'know, Ultimate Attack Troops is, um, a bit sick

[Vezzra]

I wonder if, instead of adjusting the current balance, it would now be the time to actually throw out the current numbers and redo the entire balance of all those numbers, costs, boni etc. At one point we're going to have to do it anyway, as I already brought up some time ago, we need to flatten the resource output increase curves massively. Once we do that, practically everything has to be rebalanced anyway.

Of course, that's a much, much bigger project that you've been bargaining for. It's just that when we finally will get around to that, all your efforts you now put into these adjustments will be lost. OTOH, until we reach 1.0 we're probably going to do several complete overhauls anyway, so...

[MatGB]

I'd rather do the small workable project now, as some of it will carry over later anyway.

I also plan to balance (ie nerf) some of the production bonuses at the same time as, well, I'll be working on that codebase, and I also want to really look at fleet upkeep this cycle, if we move fleet upkeep to per part as discussed then it'll massively ramp up costs in the mid to late game so that'll soak up some of the bonuses, etc.

You're right, it all needs doing, but the massive big project is too massive and big and some of the small project will carry over anyway (for example, even if we revamp the whole thing, we're going to keep something like a solar generator and a black hole generator so we might as well get them prioritised even if that might change).

Because, um, I'd rather you were working on, say, taking the galaxy generation code completely out of the C++ backend and into Python first, myself, as an example, and while this won't be a small prject there are other things I think are higher priorities balance wise than the production output curve.

Plus, I want to put in a lot more species

[Geoff the Medio]

...we need to flatten the resource output increase curves massively. Once we do that, practically everything has to be rebalanced anyway.

Something to keep in mind is bonuses that are limited to a specific number of planets for things like techs or buildings. Only acting on the capital, for example, can make for a good early-game bonus that isn't imbalanced later due to applying to 20 or 50 planets. Buildings can also give a bonus at the planet where they are produced, but be limited to (say) 5 per empire. This gives the opportunity to have less wonder-like bonus buildings, without adding a lot of pointless repetitive micromanagement producing them everywhere. They can also have a requirement to have been produced by the empire that controls a planet they are on to have a function, limiting their use to an invading empire.

[AndrewW]

This gives the opportunity to have less wonder-like bonus buildings, without adding a lot of pointless repetitive micromanagement producing them everywhere. They can also have a requirement to have been produced by the empire that controls a planet they are on to have a function, limiting their use to an invading empire.

This leads to more micromanagement then the current system. Let's see where can I best use five of these? Ok, got a new planet that is a better place for this, scrap the old building on the least valuable planet so I can now build one here instead...

[Dilvish]

This leads to more micromanagement then the current system. Let's see where can I best use five of these? Ok, got a new planet that is a better place for this, scrap the old building on the least valuable planet so I can now build one here instead...

Managing the location of 5 instances of a building is not necessarily micromanagement, it seems to me, unless perhaps there were pressure to reassess and potentially move them nearly every turn.

[Geoff the Medio]

This leads to more micromanagement then the current system. Let's see where can I best use five of these? Ok, got a new planet that is a better place for this, scrap the old building on the least valuable planet so I can now build one here instead...

In addition to it arguably not being micromanagement, various steps could be taken to limit it. Meters already grow relatively slowly, and the buildings could take a relatively long time to produce, making them more costly to scrap and reproduce elsewhere. Their full effects might also require an even longer time to be reached, so that you'd want to leave them to get older rather than relocate frequently.

[MatGB]

Right, I need to make a decision and I'm not sure where to jump on one specific tech.

Planetary Ecology was recently changed so that it gives a flat rate +1 bonus for Good and Adequate worlds that expires when the player researches Symbiotic Biology, I am very happy with the way this is working out balance wise as it makes early game research decisions more varied and interesting and allows for colonisation of adequate worlds early but not immediately.

Currently, it's affected by species traits, so Gysache get to grow on an adequate world even on turn one, and a notional Bad Population species without narrow tolerance would shrink to 0.75, I'm, sort of, OK with that but it's not ideal.

If, as discussed above, Symbiotic Biology remains affected by traits but other early bonuses aren't, then either Bad Population species need to also get a malus for Planetary Ecology, which I personally don't like as it partially defeats the point of the tech and the change and recovering from 0.75 population is slower due to the way the maths is done or, in an edge case situation a Bad Population species on a Tiny world would start to lose population once PlanEc expires and SymBio is researched. It's only a tiny amount, and it'd be an edge case rarity, but I don't like that either.

So, do I include PlanEc with the techs covered by the species traits (and thus give a fairly hefty disadvantage to BadPop species that I dislike) or do I have it not be covered and accept the rare edge case situations where Tiny worlds would get a shrink if they're at capacity when the next tech is researched?

[Sloth]

So, do I include PlanEc with the techs covered by the species traits (and thus give a fairly hefty disadvantage to BadPop species that I dislike) or do I have it not be covered and accept the rare edge case situations where Tiny worlds would get a shrink if they're at capacity when the next tech is researched?

Maybe PlanEc can expire with SubtHab and both won't be affected by species traits?

[MatGB]

Right, first pass for population bonuses is in:
Prioritised planet populations modifiers to remove some from Good/Bad…

I went with the rare edge case issue for tiny planets as being better, although it would be simpler I don't want to have PlanEc expire with SubHab as I frequently get them both really early and it sort of defeats the point, although it is still under consideration—worth looking at again when the rest of this pass is done and we've got a better idea of how it affects the overall species balance?

Two observations: as is, this makes Trith a bit better (and, hopefully, removes completely the edge case chance of them killing themselves off due to xenophobia), but it also makes Egassem a lot better, and I haven't even done the 'improve Good Industry' pass yet (that's next). So we're almost certainly going to have to remove/tone done some of the many many many other bonuses we've been giving them over the last year or so. But a little part of me quite likes the idea of Egassem being the overpowered race for at least a bit of the Dev cycle, Gysache are definitely nerfed a bit by this which was part of the idea.

@Dilvish/AI team, I don't think this messes up the AI, but they may have some edge case colonisation choice algorithms that might need tweaking, let me know if so because I may want to adjust these numbers after the initial pass and wouldn't want to do that late in Release cycle, right now we should be OK for a bit.

[Dilvish]

Right, first pass for population bonuses is in:...
@Dilvish/AI team, I don't think this messes up the AI, but they may have some edge case colonisation choice algorithms that might need tweaking, let me know if so because I may want to adjust these numbers after the initial pass and wouldn't want to do that late in Release cycle, right now we should be OK for a bit.

Is this implementing something already discussed/summarized? If so please point me to it for reference, and if not then please give us a summary; the scripting is not complex, but there is a fair bit to sift through and build up a pattern that you might be able to simply provide with a single sentence.

[MatGB]

Discussed in several threads as planned, not really summarised fully.

Basically, Good/Bad population effects to be reduced to only affect some bonuses not all of them, so the modifier itself gets default priority, the growth techs that're 'biological' in description apply before it and the 'habitation' techs, growth specials, self sustaining effects, etc all reliably happen afterwards.

Essentially, on a 'good' environment planet only Good Environment and Symbiotic Biology now get the modifiers, on other environments Xeno Genetics and similar also get the traits. Subterrenean Hab, Orbital Hab and N-Dim structures & Homeworld bonuses no longer affected.

Basically, it tones down Good Population so that the Gysache/Scylior/Tae Ghirus overpowered problem is reduced and the Egassem underpower problem likewise (in fact Egassem get a bit sick with this, going to need to tone them down). Give me a bit and I'll list which affects are moved out of affect properly.

[MatGB]

OK list:

• Growth Specials—remain where they were, last and remain unaffected
• Self Sustaining—moved to same place as growth specials and now unaffected
• Phototrophic—moved to same place as growth specials, now unaffected
• Homeworld Supply—moved to same place as growth specials, now unaffected
• Homeworld bonus—moved to same place as growth specials, now unaffected (I'm uncertain about this specific move I think it might be slightly too much)
• Environment Modifiers—all remain where they were and remain affected by species trait
  • Good
  • Adequate
  • Poor
  • Hostile
  • Uninhabitable
• "Biological" techs—remain where they were and remain affected
  • Symbiotic Biology
  • Xenological Genetics
  • Xenological Hybridisation
  • Cyborgs
• "Construction" techs—moved to after trait modifer and therefore now unaffected
  • Subterranean Habitation
  • N-Dimensional Structures
  • Orbital Habitation
  • Planetary Ecology—this one's a fudge as discussed above
• Specials—moved to after trait modifier and therefore now unaffected
  • Worldtree
  • Gaia

To restate, the changes only affect Good/Bad Population traits and substantially weakens them. This needs playtesting but it's possible I've gone too far, hard to immediately judge.

Edge case, it shouldn't affect which planets are habitable but might affect the way the AI calculates this and decides who to put there.

Of course, next up is production modifiers, I'll be doing a PR for that one—it affects more (I made a test of making cultural archives subject to Good/Ultimate Industry. Oooh boy that was a mistake) but I don't think actually messes the AI up at all, but I'd want you to confirm that one. Even minor tweaks to what Good/Ultimate Industry affects makes a big difference, and while I want to make those traits more distinctive I don't want to overpower them (they're currently underpowered but...)