DESIGN: Buildings / Build Queues / Infrastructure

Past public reviews and discussions.
Locked
Message
Author
User avatar
Obiwan
Graphics Lead Emeritus
Posts: 258
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 11:55 am
Location: Australia NSW

#226 Post by Obiwan » Tue May 25, 2004 12:58 pm

Your talkng graphical representation, which naturally interests me. Would a scan of a quick and dirty hand sketch be possible- easier for my brain to follow.

User avatar
Impaler
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1060
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:40 am
Location: Tucson, Arizona USA

#227 Post by Impaler » Tue May 25, 2004 1:04 pm

I have been thinking of buying a Scanner but I am wondering if I can upload the Images of my Hand Scetches onto Free Orion or can I only provide links to a Page that already holds it? I dont currently have a website.
Fear is the Mind Killer - Frank Herbert -Dune

Satyagraha
Space Kraken
Posts: 195
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Austria

#228 Post by Satyagraha » Tue May 25, 2004 1:15 pm

noelte wrote: How about designing shipyards out of components? Those components might be really expensiv on construction/maintaince and get even more expensiv based on how many are already in place. This way every planet can build it's own little shipyard.
i agree that we should have different shipyards for different ships. would allow additional strategic choices (f.e. strike a specific shipyard to prevent the enemy from getting a counter to your fleet, then use the delay to cause some havoc). Although every planet having it´s own shipyard is something that should be avoided.

@ implaler: you need to get your own webspace. i got mine for free at http://www.brinkster.com which is ok as long as you only want to host pics.

edit: btw for clarification, what exactly is the reason we have minerals -> industry -> PP? what is the supposed gamplay effect? i thought only minerals are shared, and industry -> PP is local, looks like i was wrong there...

User avatar
Daveybaby
Small Juggernaut
Posts: 724
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 11:07 am
Location: Hastings, UK

#229 Post by Daveybaby » Tue May 25, 2004 1:38 pm

Impaler wrote:I dont currently have a website.
This sort of thing is puzzling me more and more lately... i mean... what sort of ISP are you using that *still* in this day and age doesnt give you buckets of webspace for free? I dont know what its like elsewhere in the world but in the UK i cant think of a any way to get online (other than through work on using a cybercafe) that doesnt come with free webhosting.

Or am i completely missing the point here?
The COW Project : You have a spy in your midst.

drek
Designer Emeritus
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:07 am

#230 Post by drek » Tue May 25, 2004 3:13 pm

obi:
My build and research queue images remain at http://home.earthlink.net/~drekmonger/Buildv3/

Including a picture of a research queue that uses the same paradigm as the build queue. It's the orginal tetris queue--not as complicated as Impaler's but the same general idea.

impaler:

In tzlaine's orginal proposal, ships are not built at a specfic location. Rather, they are built into reserves (like moo3), but can only be dragged out into the field of play at shipyards/mobilization centers/whatever.

Buildings are limited by (1) focus/social meter requirements. (2) build slots. You can't build a shipyard at a pissant world, because there's an Industry and Infrastructure meter requirement. You can't build 20 wonders at the same world because there's not enough build slots.

Basically, I don't see the need for any confusing effiency penalties for buildings lots of stuff at the same location.

The limit to total capacity in the queue would be based entirely on total Industry--just as the total capacity in the research queue is based entirely on total Reseach.

Also note that with a global queue there's no need for the horizontal dimension. From the top, a box represents Industry capacity. Any projects within that box get worked on. As projects are completed, they are removed--projects below bubble up and into to the capacity box.

User avatar
Impaler
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1060
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2003 12:40 am
Location: Tucson, Arizona USA

#231 Post by Impaler » Tue May 25, 2004 3:38 pm

I realy dont like the Idea of Building ships into Reserves ( I dont realy like the idea of Reserves in general, its must a "fog" between the player and the strategic deplyment of his ships and Moo3 used it for suposed "macro managment") I prefer we simply let a player set a ship/fleet to "mothball" and he saves some Maintance, unmothballing takes time and resorces. Much simpler and less exploitable I think.

If ships are moved from System to system then they should be built at the system level, likewise the shipyard should also go at the system rather then planet level. In general things should be built on the same level as they are atactched too, if its atached to a planet then you need to select Planet X builds thing Y, a ship though is never "AT" a planet is simply at a system so build it at the system level and manage that with an Empire wide quee.

The problem I have with Empire wide pooling is that theirs no bottle neck or insentive to NOT focus all your capacity into one spot and Boom that spot right up to the maximum alowable befor moving onto the next place and exploding it to full development. Even with limits on how much one place can have theirs no insentive to spread production out.
Fear is the Mind Killer - Frank Herbert -Dune

User avatar
Krikkitone
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1517
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 6:52 pm

#232 Post by Krikkitone » Tue May 25, 2004 4:38 pm

To all th objections on a Global build queue allowing mass concentration of your resources.

Because Everything is built at a planet, then the build rate is based on Local conditions.

So you can't 'Rush' things from your whole empire, unless its specifically designed that way.

Ships (of course) would be designed to be 'rushed' beyong local production capacity because they rely on a few shipyards (but the amount that they could be rushed would be limited)

Non-Industrial Infrastructure would of course grow based on the Non-Industrial Infrastructure at the planet rather than local production*(so that a new 'Farming world' will grow just as fast as a new 'Industrial world' meaning you can set the Foci based on what this world is really best at.)

If you successfully captured an enemy High Industrry Infrastructure World with a shipyard, thenyou could Begin pumping out yopu ships there..although the shipyard and Industrial Infrastructure is likely to be damaged, as well as whatever penalty there is for a conquered population.

So likely an newly conquered shipyard would only be able to pump out 1/5 to 1/10 as many ships as a safe, native un-bombed-out one.

*This is the bit I do agree with Drek on for Infrastructure that the 'Natural rate' should basically be fixed (of course I would have that cost resources and be scalable down to 0..And my model wouldn't be a 0 to 100 or 0 to 10 scale but a 0 and more number where the max usable was set by population+technology, My model would also have 5 Infrastructure Numbers..to accomodate the slow transition to a Focus Change.)

User avatar
PowerCrazy
Creative Contributor
Posts: 383
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 2:35 am
Location: Texas

#233 Post by PowerCrazy » Wed May 26, 2004 12:35 am

I'm still a little uneasy about universal PPs. Systems like this in every game I can think of are begging to be exploited and often are. It just seems like there could be an easier/better way, or at elast some kind of limit. If this method was used solely for ships, I wouldn't have a problem. But we are goign to have a few buildings and I don't want them to be able to be built instantly no matter where you build them. For example, Starbases. You found a new colony in the middle of an enemy empire, and next turn plop a starbase down. Then make it an industrial planet and soon you have your entire empires production being pumped into that planet evrey turn. Its game breaking.
Aquitaine is my Hero.... ;)

Hexxium
Space Floater
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2004 8:40 pm

#234 Post by Hexxium » Wed May 26, 2004 1:53 am

I'll try to keep my post short but it's not easy, I'm sorry :)

Infrastructure development

As I understand it, infrastructure was proposed as a substitute for individual buildings. Now why should infrastructure growth be free?

In general, I think nothing should be completely free (as in free beer, not free speech ;) ) in - uhm - Free Orion :). Everything should require either an initial investment cost or maintenance or both.
Even population has a "maintenance" cost (food).

I don't think infrastructure should require maintenance - or we would need a way to reduce or deactivate it - micro again. Infrastructure should always be better than no infrastructure, but building it should come at a cost. The player should also be able to influence (at least prioritize) infrastructure growth. That's exactly what you would do with buildings. I'm always against a concept that limits player choices.

I'm aware that a cost for infrastructure probably means micromanagement, and I don't see a solution for this right now :(

Global build queue
drek wrote:I think we can get a global queue to work. However, it will require significant design work and creativity to make it work intutively.
drek wrote:The UI for the research and build queues could be nigh identical. This would mean less code to write, and one less system for the player to learn.
Players still have to get used to a global queue - most are familiar with local queues/production.

And in general, I don't consider both "less/more work" (for designers/programmers - not for players!) valid arguments, as long as the goals remain realistic, and as long as the extra work is beneficial to the game, of course. We should use the best approach, not the easiest one.

Please note that I'm not saying anything about a global queue here. The suggestions in this thread conviced me that a global queue has some advantages. I think we just should use the approach that represents the production system best, and if that will be global, a global queue probably i is the right choice.

Globalization/macromanagement

By using a global system for sharing ressources, you're pushing the player's focus from planet management more and more towards empire management. I think most of us would agree that this is a good thing, to some extent. I don't want to be concerned about every single planet having enough food, I want to make sure my Empire has enough food.

I know I'm exaggerating, but... I also want to feel like my empire is actually made of systems and planets... otherwise we just could have global sliders for the whole empire's food/ mineral/ production/ research (maybe infrastructure) output, instead of "microing" that by setting every single planets' focus.

Now imagine you could

- "Build up a flourishing new farming colony for your people" or
- "Invest xxx ressources and x turns to increase empire food production by x%".

Which one sounds more fun? Of course the effect is the same, but for me it can make the difference between a great and a boring game.

Now my point is that it's possible to completely ruin the feel, or depth of a game by simplifying or reducing micromanagement too much. It's important to find a way in between. In some cases it may be possible to have both possibilities by finding good (i.e. not MoO3-like) ways to "macro-control micromanagement". Please note that I don't mean AI control, like governors/assistants, just efficient ways to control things.

The most important thing, however, is to find ways to reduce micro or simplyfy things without reducing strategic options or limiting decisions to only a few viable choices.

drek
Designer Emeritus
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:07 am

#235 Post by drek » Wed May 26, 2004 2:52 am

Powercrazy:

With the focus system in place -and- local queues, it becomes optimal to switch to Industrial focus while building stuff on the planet. Basically, how are farming, mining, money, etc. worlds suppose to get buildings *without* switching to industrial? Obvsiouly, PP needs to be shared from industrial worlds--the question is how. I think tzlaine's global queue provides the best answer.

A new world has a very low infrastructure. If shipyards can only be built on worlds with a certain amount of Industrial infrastructure, then that new world will have to be built up before the shipyard can be placed. Meanwhile, it's a vulnerable colony--due to it's low infrastructure easy to capture or destory.

Plus, since shipyards (and other structures) are so expensive, it would be foolhardy to build one a border world. Just too easy for an enemy to take the structure, and use it against the orginal owner.

Finally, if build projects are like research projects in that they cost a certain number of turns to complete, even an empire flush with PP would still have to invest a lengthy number of turns in completing a shipyard project.
Now imagine you could

- "Build up a flourishing new farming colony for your people" or
- "Invest xxx ressources and x turns to increase empire food production by x%".
I'm a big fan of ensuring that each world has it's own unique character. I'm hoping that we have a large list of planet specials that spawn story-based events--and that nearly every world sports such a special.

Due to the sheer expense of buildings under powercrazy's build paradigm, every build decision is like a move in chess. Location, planet specials, etc. would have to be carefully considered before deciding to invest in a building. Though these carefully considered moves, I would hope the player learns the lay of the galaxy, evocating a sense that each world plays it's own unique role in the space opera story of the game.

I don't think a global queue reduces the character of indivdual worlds significantly, due to these factors.

User avatar
Obiwan
Graphics Lead Emeritus
Posts: 258
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 11:55 am
Location: Australia NSW

#236 Post by Obiwan » Wed May 26, 2004 4:59 am

Is this a helpful idea, hope so.


Well cancel that, looks like i was off target :?
Last edited by Obiwan on Wed May 26, 2004 1:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Krikkitone
Creative Contributor
Posts: 1517
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 6:52 pm

#237 Post by Krikkitone » Wed May 26, 2004 6:51 am

Obiwan.. I think that looks more like a plan for assigning Focus to worlds than deciding what buildings they are going to build. (A pretty good plan though)
I'm aware that a cost for infrastructure probably means micromanagement, and I don't see a solution for this right now
Well the micromanagement regarding infrastructures are
1. choosing the Foci of the Planet (a decision that Will need some Imperial macro tools when we have many planets, ie I want more Minerals on an Imperial Level and so more worlds should move to a Mineral Secondary or Primary Focus...There is probably a reasonably simple way to do this.. but that is another issue for Later)
2. choosing what priority building infrastructure gets in the Global Queue.

Part 2 can be broken down in several ways
1. by planet
2. by how developed ihe infrastructure already is

So the 'Projects' that would be in the Queue would be
Build Infrastructure [X] on [A]
where [X] is something like 0-10%, 10-30%, 30-60%, or 60-100% of Max desired {or 0-100% (which works like a series of the previous projects since boosting low infrastructure would usually be highest priority)}
and [A] is a planet or group of planets

Because Infrastructure would have a 'Maximum Growth Rate', in standard queue fashion it would always be best to get that maximum rate or just not have a particular infrastructure grow at all this turn.

The Infrastructure 'Projects' would essentially roll over into the next higher category..which would probably be lower priority...once they completed..unless they reached 100% in which case they would just stop.

I'd see an Empires' Standard Industry queue looking something like this

Fleety Maintenance

High Priority Things:
Ships,
Buildings,
Infrastructures on Certain Worlds
(ie Research Worlds to make sure Research is up to speed, or Bonus Worlds, or planned Special Building/Fortress Worlds)
or Rushing* Low Level Infrastructure (because exponential growth makes for a Slow start, and with the minimal Infrastructure there it is still low cost for Rushing)


Build Infrastructure (0-100%) at (Everywhere)

Low Priority Things:
Extra Ships
'It'd Be Nice' Buildings
Rush Infrastructure at Moderate Levels

Soak Projects:
Rush Infrastructure (0-100%) at (Everywhere)
Repeat Build Standard Ship/Defensive Instalations, etc.

*In my model Rush would be MOO1 ish, Almost any project could have a corresponding 'Rush' Project which would add to the same project for a extra cost (allowing it to get to a total of 2x its standard max investment for a total of 3x the cost..the extra 1 invest and 2 cost from the rush)

drek
Designer Emeritus
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 8:07 am

#238 Post by drek » Wed May 26, 2004 7:38 am

Building infrastructure just doesn't mesh with a global queue. It's too many items to juggle, esp. in late game, to fit into one queue.

The orginal idea behind infra was that it would build automatically if the planet wasn't building anything else--no micromanagement required. Hence two methods of improving infrastructure spring to mind:

1: unspent PPs are automatically donated to improving infrastrucure. (as per PC's orginal proposal)
2: Infrastructure improves regardless of PP, the "investment" entirely abstracted (my refinement meant for use with a global queue, because I'd rather not deal with the problem of how to divide unspent PPs between worlds)

If infra improving involves a great deal of micromanagement, then the benefits of the system are entirely eliminated.

If additional control over infra building is desired, I continue to suggest using Leaders as tokens--placing certain Leaders in a system would increase the infra improvement rate. It makes some gameplay sense: you'd be sending a Governer to a fledgling colony to whip it into shape. If the number of Leaders is limited, the player would have to choose carefully where to position 'em: a real decision instead of just improving every piece of random real estate possible.

User avatar
PowerCrazy
Creative Contributor
Posts: 383
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 2:35 am
Location: Texas

#239 Post by PowerCrazy » Wed May 26, 2004 10:15 am

Ok. I'll go along with this proposal as best as I can. Because I can't come up with a viable alternative I shall accept this when number crunching time is here. Also you compared FO to chess very successfully and I'm a sucker for chess. So we shall see how this all comes out in the public review and decision thread. The tetris pieces idea is very streamlined and I like it a lot.

I just thought of a potential way to balance the global PP. The planets infrastructure determines how much benefit a planet will gain from the universal PP. Thus a newly founded planet with infrastructure at 1 would get say 1% of the total resources devoted to it. Thus you can't just plop down a shiny new starbase unless you have a HUGE empire. (and if you have a huge empire then I say you can do anything you want if the price is right). Also it will keep all of your valuable shipyard planets truely valuable. As they will use universal PP at a high percentage (>80% "efficency"). Assuming it takes a long time for a planet to get a full 100% infrastructure it will encourage the player to protect those inner core planets. Also certain buildings may require a certain infrastructure rating before you start building them, though this might not be necessary.

Until a better solution is presented this seems sound to me.

Of course when we start deciding on techs there needs to be turn reducer tech so that empires can build faster. But that is for a later time.
Aquitaine is my Hero.... ;)

User avatar
Ragnar
Space Squid
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:22 pm
Location: McKinney, Texas

#240 Post by Ragnar » Wed May 26, 2004 2:38 pm

I don't think infrastructure should be automatic at a set rate only. It should grow without any action, BUT there must be an option to 'rush' it. Whether this is through a leader or the build que, doesn't matter to me. When I find a prime planet, I want the ability to pour imperial resources into it's development and not have to wait for it to grow slowly like the rest of the backwater worlds.

The efficiency % based on infrastructure % seems like a great idea, if we stipulate that all planets can spend 100% of their own PP and then apply the inefficeincy to the external PP coming in. This will nicely limit rush building if you want to be efficient, but with the option to spend all your resources at a hideous cost on one undeveloped world. It makes the highly developed world very strategic. In the case of the game breaker, capturing a developed world with shipyard and cranking out all your empires production: I guess the other guy should have protected it better :D I think if we implement some heavy infrastructure loss (50%)due to colateral damage upon conquering, it will temper this effect enough to balance things out.

In general, we should have ques and actions localized with UI contols globalized. I want to be ABLE to tinker with a planet, but don't want to HAVE to do it. IE - we should have the tetris que at the empire level, but when I go to the planet I should have a tetris que that only has that planet's build items. I should be able to add things from there that get placed into the imperial que or vice versa.

Locked