Supply

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

Moderators: Oberlus, Committer

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

Supply

#1 Post by Sloth »

To continue the discussion from here viewtopic.php?f=28&t=8650&start=30 i started this new topic, otherwise it could get lost.

Fractions weren't recieved well, but no alternative was presented. So here's my next proposition of simple macros:

Species:
Bad Supply or Outpost +0
Average Supply +1
Great Supply +2
Ultimate Supply +3

Planet size (to give tiny and small planets an advantage):
Tiny +2
Small +1
Medium +0
Large -1
Huge -2

It's more extreme, but easier to remember and notice.
All released under the GNU GPL 2.0 and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 licences.

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

Re: Supply

#2 Post by MatGB »

That would work for me, with one caveat.

The species description for Volp Uglush is a nice one and I like the flavour it gives them. They're awesome bureacrats who don't want to live off planet but are great at organising and directing fleet operations. But they also have a Huge homeworld.

Ultimate +3 and Huge -2 makes them no better than a standard species on a medium world. I guess we could code something specific for them into their effects and leave the rest with your numbers which do completely make sense.

Oh, I'm also now of the opinion that whoever said doubling was problematic for the Space Elevator was in fact correct and that should get a flat bonus, probably +3 to tie in with IntLog. Combine SE with other effects, especially the marvellous Megalith bonus it gets you past massive areas of empty space.
Mat Bowles

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

User avatar
eleazar
Design & Graphics Lead Emeritus
Posts: 3858
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 7:09 pm
Location: USA — midwest

Re: Supply

#3 Post by eleazar »

I think there is and still should be a +1 for homeworlds.

From a concept standpoint, the bonuses for small planets represent the ease shipping stuff out of their shallow gravity well. Since the space elevator is basically a way to (almost) ignore the gravity well, its bonus could be flat -- replacing the size bonus/malus. This would probably make finding a number that doesn't make the smaller sizes overpowered easier.

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

Re: Supply

#4 Post by Sloth »

eleazar wrote:I think there is and still should be a +1 for homeworlds.
Yes, that should stay the way it was. Otherwise Bad Supply would be a very big handicap for starting species.
eleazar wrote:From a concept standpoint, the bonuses for small planets represent the ease shipping stuff out of their shallow gravity well. Since the space elevator is basically a way to (almost) ignore the gravity well, its bonus could be flat -- replacing the size bonus/malus. This would probably make finding a number that doesn't make the smaller sizes overpowered easier.
This is a very good idea eleazar!
How does a flat +3 instead of planet size modifier sound? or +2 (which would make it useless for tiny)?
All released under the GNU GPL 2.0 and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 licences.

User avatar
Vezzra
Release Manager, Design
Posts: 5415
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Sol III

Re: Supply

#5 Post by Vezzra »

Sloth wrote:How does a flat +3 instead of planet size modifier sound? or +2 (which would make it useless for tiny)?
A flat +3 does sound reasonable. IMO +2 would be a bit too low.

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

Re: Supply

#6 Post by Dilvish »

Vezzra wrote:A flat +3 does sound reasonable. IMO +2 would be a bit too low.
I agree.
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
MatGB
Creative Contributor
Posts: 3310
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:45 pm

Re: Supply

#7 Post by MatGB »

Not sure about replacing the planets own normal supply, even small worlds have gravity wells, etc. Prepared to try it, but it might be too weakening to something that's actually quite nice as a strategically placed building.
Mat Bowles

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

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 12745
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Supply

#8 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Sloth wrote:Species:
Bad Supply or Outpost +0
Average Supply +1
Great Supply +2
Ultimate Supply +3

Planet size (to give tiny and small planets an advantage):
Tiny +2
Small +1
Medium +0
Large -1
Huge -2
eleazar wrote:I think there is and still should be a +1 for homeworlds.
Sloth wrote:How does a flat +3 [or +2 sound for space elevators] instead of planet size modifier sound?
Even with +1 for homeworlds, if species start on a large planet, as most do I think, with average supply (+1) that will be a range of 1 total for the starting homeworld. Is that adequate? It doesn't seem to leave much room for bad supply species to be any different from average supply species. Currently it's 2 supply range for starting planets. As an alternative, the bonus could be +2 for the capital planet (or +1 homeworlds and +1 capital if there's some reason that homeworlds and not capitals were meant above...)

Also, if the point of elevators is to make things almost like having a tiny planet, then they could give a varied bonus so that they do nothing for a tiny, give +1 to a small and +2 to a medium, large or huge... or +2 medium, +3 large, +4 huge.

This would have the possible advantage of not making an ultimate supply species on a tiny planet very overpowered... +3 ultimate, +2 tiny, +2 or +3 elevator would be 7 or 8 supply range... before any other bonuses from techs.

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

Re: Supply

#9 Post by MatGB »

I think I quite like the idea of variable bonus from the space elevator depending on size, and not have it replace the existing bonus, then the advantage is still there and more obvious for bigger planets.

Re starting supply, the +2 basic from your starting homeworld is +1 basic, +1 for Imperial Palace, which I think should stay, so the capitol, normally your starting homeworld, would get whatever the species normally gets with an additional +1. I quite like the idea of all homeworlds getting +1 as well, but am not sure it'd balance well.
Mat Bowles

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

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

Re: Supply

#10 Post by Sloth »

Geoff the Medio wrote: Even with +1 for homeworlds, if species start on a large planet, as most do I think, with average supply (+1) that will be a range of 1 total for the starting homeworld. Is that adequate? It doesn't seem to leave much room for bad supply species to be any different from average supply species. Currently it's 2 supply range for starting planets. As an alternative, the bonus could be +2 for the capital planet (or +1 homeworlds and +1 capital if there's some reason that homeworlds and not capitals were meant above...)
MatGB wrote:Re starting supply, the +2 basic from your starting homeworld is +1 basic, +1 for Imperial Palace, which I think should stay, so the capitol, normally your starting homeworld, would get whatever the species normally gets with an additional +1. I quite like the idea of all homeworlds getting +1 as well, but am not sure it'd balance well.
Bad Supply would be a risky handicap for a starting species. Starting with 1 supply instead of 2 can screw yor expansion plans. But i think it's nice to have to change your strategy from time to time. Your would have to build outposts, colonize tiny planets and/or aggressively research the supply techs not to fall behind too much.

Adding another +1 bonus is not necessary imho.
Geoff the Medio wrote: Also, if the point of elevators is to make things almost like having a tiny planet, then they could give a varied bonus so that they do nothing for a tiny, give +1 to a small and +2 to a medium, large or huge... or +2 medium, +3 large, +4 huge.

This would have the possible advantage of not making an ultimate supply species on a tiny planet very overpowered... +3 ultimate, +2 tiny, +2 or +3 elevator would be 7 or 8 supply range... before any other bonuses from techs.
That is exactly what eleazar suggested. Replacing the size modifier with a +3 modifier is the same as +1 to tiny, +2 to small, ... , +5 to huge.
All released under the GNU GPL 2.0 and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 licences.

User avatar
OllyG
Space Kraken
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:03 pm

Re: Supply

#11 Post by OllyG »

eleazar wrote:From a concept standpoint, the bonuses for small planets represent the ease shipping stuff out of their shallow gravity well. Since the space elevator is basically a way to (almost) ignore the gravity well, its bonus could be flat -- replacing the size bonus/malus. This would probably make finding a number that doesn't make the smaller sizes overpowered easier.
In this case Asteroids should have a good supply bonus - possibly +3, since they have even less gravity than a tiny world and a space elevator would be useless, since I'd assume when an asteroid belt is colonised the inhabitants and industry is spread between multiple asteroids. Also in case Gas Giants can be colonised in future they should have a -3 penalty.

But my worry is that supply is going to based very much on planet size and the technologies that give bonuses will not be much use.

Building a Space Elevator should be harder on a larger world. It gives a bigger bonus so it would be reasonable to require more PP and/or minimum turns.

How about using fractions and let a half from each side of a starlane add up to 1, so if two planets in adjacent systems have half a point of supply each they are supply connected - the starmap could show the supply reaching halfway to a system if no planet with supply is at the other end.

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

Re: Supply

#12 Post by Sloth »

OllyG wrote:In this case Asteroids should have a good supply bonus - possibly +3, since they have even less gravity than a tiny world and a space elevator would be useless, since I'd assume when an asteroid belt is colonised the inhabitants and industry is spread between multiple asteroids. Also in case Gas Giants can be colonised in future they should have a -3 penalty.
I don't think Asteroids should give a +3 bonus. It would be much harder to establish a proper outpost that has the infrastructure supply needs.
I agree that Gas Giants should give a -3 penalty, which affects outposts on them.
OllyG wrote:But my worry is that supply is going to based very much on planet size and the technologies that give bonuses will not be much use.
This has to be tested. But my guess is that techs will still be important for supply.
OllyG wrote:Building a Space Elevator should be harder on a larger world. It gives a bigger bonus so it would be reasonable to require more PP and/or minimum turns.
This is an idea worth considering, but i don't know whether scripting this is possible at the moment.

Attached is a patch that implements my numbers.

I've also assigned a supply classification to the species. Most have Average Supply.

Bad Supply: (most of these can't build/board ships, so why should they be better than an outpost)
FURTHEST
NYMNMN
OURBOOLS
PHINNERT
RAAAGH
TRENCHERS

Great Supply:
SILEXIAN
LAENFA (playable)
GEORGE (playable)
ETTY (playable)
ACIREMA

Ultimate Supply:
VOLP

I hope someone can come up with more ideas to put some species into another class (because it's still a little boring).
Attachments

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

All released under the GNU GPL 2.0 and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 licences.

User avatar
OllyG
Space Kraken
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:03 pm

Re: Supply

#13 Post by OllyG »

Why not give any species that can't build ships 'No Supply' and those who can't colonise 'Bad Supply'?

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

Re: Supply

#14 Post by MatGB »

Just because a species doesn't travel/build doesn't mean it doesn't trade or that there won't be trade stations &c there, I'd not be keen on "no supply" for both game balance reasons and for story reasons, if it's part of the empire/whatever it's going to have traders, diplomatic posts, space facilities &c

On the flip side, some species that can't colonise are, in the story, good traders/organisers, etc. If they can build ships, they can trade/send merchant vessels, etc. Even if they can't, they can make good bureacrats.

I'd be more inclined to look at this as another way to balance creatures stat wise, then amend the storyfor them if necessary—for a start I nominate Mu Ursh for bad supply, they're a bit OTT as is and need some disadvantages, I'd also like to give them Bad Shields if we get around to doing that.
Mat Bowles

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

User avatar
Geoff the Medio
Programming, Design, Admin
Posts: 12745
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 1:33 am
Location: Munich

Re: Supply

#15 Post by Geoff the Medio »

Any AI concerns, Dilvish?

Post Reply